Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas

Media

Part of Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas

Title: Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas
Description: Boletin Eclesiastico de Filipinas, Official Interdiocesan Organ, is published monthly by the University of Santo Tomas and is printed at U.S.T. Press, Manila, Philippines. Entered as Second Class Mail Matter at the Manila Post Office on June 21, 1946.
Issue Date: Volume XLII (Issue No. 474) September 1968
Publisher: University of Santo Tomas
Year: 1968
Language: English
Subject: Catholic Church--Philippines--Periodicals
Rights
Place of publication: Manila
extracted text: *n Doletin ■pCLESIASTICO DE Ci E-ILIPINAS OFFICIAL INTERDIOCESAN ORGAN • THE PHILIPPINE ECCLESIASTICAL REVIEW • CREDO OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD • HUMANAE VITAE—REGULATION OF BIRTH • ORDINATION RITES • RELIIOUS FREEDOM • YOU AND YOUR EAM REUNION • THE OBLATES OF [ARY IMMACULATE. VOL. XLII NO. 474 SEPTEMBER, 1968 BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE piLIPINAS EDITORIAL STAFF EDITOR LEONARDO Z. LEGASPI, O.P. ASSISTANT EDITOR FIDEL V1LLAROEL, O.P. ASSOCIATE EDITORS 1R ANCISO DEL RIO. O.P. QUINTIN M. GARCIA, O.P. JESUS MERINO, O.P. EFREN RIVERA. O.P. PEDRO V. SALGADO. O.P. POMPEYO DE MESA. O.P. MIGUEL D1N1O, O.P. BUSINESS MANAGER FLORENCIO TESTER A, O.P. BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Official Interdiocesan Organ is published monthly by the University of Santo Tomas and is printed at U.S.T. Press, Manila, Philippines. Entered as Second Class Mail Matter at the' Manila Post Office on June 21, 1946. Subscription Rates: Yearly subscription in the Philippines, P10.00; Abroad, $4.00. Price per copy, P1.00. Subscriptions are paid in advance. Communications of an editorial nature concerning articles, cases and reviews should be addressed to the Editor. Advertising and subscription enquiries should be addressed to the Business Manager. Orders for renewals or changes of address should in clude both old and new address, and will go into effect fifteen days after notification. Address all communications to: BOLETIN ECLESIASTICO DE FILIPINAS Fathers' Residence University of Santo Tomas Manila, Philippines MOST REV. FRANCISCO R. CRUCES, D.D. Auxiliary Bishop of Lingayen-Dagupan Vol. XLII • No. 474 September 1968 TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORIAL 614 THE POPE SPEAKS Reverence to Leaders of Christianity 616 Credo of the People of God 62'j "Humanae Vitae" — Encyclical Letter on the Regulation of Birth 631 DOCUMENTATION Constitution on Revision of Ordination Rites 652 Motu Proprio on Pontifical Insignia 657 OOCTRINAL SECTION A Misunderstanding of Religious Freedom by L. CULLUM, SJ. 661 PASTORAL SECTION Homiletics — 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st Sundays after Pentecost by DAVID TITHER, C.SS.R. 666 De Colores —You and Your Team Reunion by GUILLERMO TEJON, O.P. 675 CASES AND QUERIES Transplantation of Organs by M. BORRAJO, O.P. 681 Head Bow during Holy Cummunion by P. DE MESA, O.P. 683 On Priests Going to the Movie Theaters by B. ALONSO, O.P. 683 CHRISTIANIZATION OF THE PHILIPPINES The Oblates of Mary Immaculate in the Philippines 688 THE CHURCH HERE AND THERE 696 BOOK REVIEWS 703 EDITORIAL CREDO OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD In 2,000 years the bark of Peter—a seaworthy ship indeed— has sailed its course through the "eye" of many a hurricane to the balmy shores of tranquility. Today not a few are trying to get their "sea legs" as the winds of change churn up the new channels and lanes through which the bark has set its course. New currents are swirling violently around the Bark. We are suffering from sea-sickness in this rough, unaccustomed passage. As in times past, it is to the man at the helm that we look for guidance in bringing the Bark once more into tranquil waters. We are not disappointed. The Captain has spoken out with-fi thunderous profession of faith The setting—during a Mass at St. Peter's Square before 50,000 people; the occasion—the closing of the "Year of Faith" give to the message a decidedly additional solemnity, weight and clarity which closes every avenue of doubt or misinterpretation. In obedience to the ardent and persistent pleas from Bishops and faithful all over the world, the Pope came out to confirm his brothers in faith, to emphasize his duty of protecting the teaching authority of the Church and of warning the People of God against being taken in by interpretations of Catholic dogmas that are strange interpretations of the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church. There was no question of any dogmatic definition—the Pope made this very clear nor was there any need for such—but the form in which the Credo is couched, the occasion and the very introductory words give evidence to all and sundry that there is here a question of a real Symbol of Faith, a rule of faith, a veritable synthesis of the fundamental dogmas. 615 Inevitably adverse criticisms will spring up from certain quar ters as to the prudence or validity of the condemnations of theolo gical novelties and the reaffirmation of traditional teachings at this time. A widely circulated secular weekly has already done so in one of its recent issues. The Credo of the People of God will be challenged on the ground that it is unsuited to contemporary intelligent society, incomprehensible to pagans and very clerical. It will be accused of confusing what is a new approach for an alteration of doctrine. These are the winds and the waves in the voyage of the Bark of Peter which have to be expected and met with equal firmness and vigour of faith from the part of the People of God. It is now the task of theologians and preachers to search with persevering effort for a more profound understanding of this Credc. It is for them to give a more perfect expression of these mysteries and in this way to do all they can to provide an answer to the new questions which contemporary world brings to the fore. The freedom of investigation is not curtailed, but if it must be true freedom, it must always be contained within the limitations set by the word of God as it has been constantly preserved and as it is taught and explained by the divine magisterium of the Church and especially of the Vicar of Christ. Finally, it is made more urgent to impress in their minds that in communicating their con clusions they should see to it that it is made in such a way as to imbue their brethren with a spirit of love and reverence toward the Word of God and the Teaching Church. In this way, we, the pastors and the faithful of the Church, will, in union with Paul VI, make the Credo of the People of God the norm of our belief and life, and do justice to the very meaning of the closing of the "Year of Faith". REVERENCE TO LEADERS OF CHRISTIANITY During the final General Audience of the “Year of Faith” on Wednesday June 26 the Holy Father, urging renewed devo tion of the Founders of the Church of Rome, made known the discovery of the relics of St. Peter. Beloved Sons and Daughters, At the conclusion cf the “Year of Faith” which We dedicated to the mcmcry cf the 19th centenary of the martyrdom suffered at Rome bv the holy Apostles Peter and Paul for the name of Christ, we must turn cur theughts with reverence to these Leaders of Christianity, who can be cci"idered tc be. as they were described at the end of the first century bv Pope St. Clement I, third successor of St. Peter and thus fourth Bishop cf the Reman See, "the highest and most upright columns” (I Ccr. V) cf the "pilgrim Church of God at Rome” (ib.), and were thenceforth always honoured together as the apostolic foundations of the Roman and universal Church. Peter and Paul: Foundation and Architect of the Church of Rome This is net the moment to pronounce a panegyric on them nor to introduce historical questions with reference to the coming of one or ether cf them to Rome and to their martyrdom, nor yet to speak of the development of that veneration which Rome and the entire Christian world paid to these incomparable witnesses to the Christian message and to its reality. It is not even the moment for considering how in this remembrance 617 of them they have always been associated together as one (cf. St. Igna tius ad Rom. IV), though, as St. Ambrose says, St. Peter was the founda tion of the Church, while St. Pul was the architect, the builder (De Sp. S. II, 13, 158; P.L. 16, 808). He means that their functions in the Christian communitv at Rome were diverse—the one, St. Peter, being the Bishcp; the ether, St. Paul, being the Preacher of the Gospel, although as St. Irenaeus affirms, both together combined to originate the hierarchic tradition of the Church of Rome (Contra haereses III, 3; P. G. 7, 848849) The Tombs of the Apostles at Rome What concerns us in the present brief meeting is to re-enkindle in our minds our veneration, love, fidelity towards these Apostles who constituted the beginnings of the Reman Church and left to her the heritage cf their word, cf their authority, of their blood, equal in their diversity, as St. Leo proclaims them: “electio pares, et labor similes, et finis fecit aequales”—on a par by their election to the apostolate, alike in the work they did, and made equal by their martyrdom (Sermo 82, 7; P. L. 54, 428). But the one was endowed with the powers of the Kingdom cf Heaven, the other wdh the knowledge of things divine; the one was the Shepherd, the other the Teacher. We arc helped toward the increase of these sentiments of veneration, by the traces, historical and local, left behind by them and at the same time inevitably interested in these latter. They could not be overlccked by us Romans nor by those who move about Rome, human and material records as they are of the memory of the Apostles “per quos religionis sumpsit exordium”—through whom our religious life had its origin (Collect of the Mass). Let us recall, too, the first written record of this local veneration. Eusebius of Caesarea, father of ecclesiastical history, writes: “It is told that Paul was beheaded by him (Nero) and Peter crucified at Rome; and this is now confirmed by the splendid monuments to the names cf Peter and Paul still visited in the cemeteries of the city of Rome. For the rest, Gaius, an ecclesiastic who lived at the time when Zepherinus was Bishop of Rome (199-217), in writing against Proclus, leader of the Montanist sect (Kataphrygians), speaks of the places where the sacred remains of the said apostles were deposited: I can show you the trophies of the Apos618 ties. If you will go to the Vatican or along the Via Ostiensis you will find the trophies of the founders of this Church” (Hist. Eccl. II, 25: P. L. 20, 207-210). Excavation under the High Altar of St. Peter’s A good deal has been said in recent years about these “trophies” for no one doubts that by “trophies” are meant the tombs of the two martyr Apostles, which were already objects of veneration before the evidence of this offered by Gaius, and therefore in the second century. Recently the attention of those studying the matter has been fixed on the trophy erected over the tomb of St. Peter, appropriately called the trophy of Gaius. We owe this tremendous interest to the excavations which our venerated Predecessor Pope Pius XII ordered to be made under this central altar, called the “Confession”, in St. Peter’s Basilica, so as the better to identify the tomb of the Apostle over which, and in its honour, this Basilica was erected. These excavations, very difficult and very delicate, were carried out between 1940 and 1950, with archaelogical results of the greatest importance as everyone knows, by outstanding ar chaeologists and workmen whose devoted care given to this arduous in vestigation is worthy of praise and recognition. In his Christmas broad cast cn December 23rd, 1950, Pope Pius XII spoke thus of the matter: “. . . the essential question is this: Has the tomb of St. Peter actuallybeen discovered? The final conclusion of the work and of the study answers the question with a most clear Yes. The tomb of the Prince of the Apostles has been found. A second question, following on the first, is in regard to the relics of the Saint. Have these been discovered? (Discourses and Broadcasts XII, 380). The reply given at that time by the venerated Pontiff left the matter in suspense, in doubt. The final discovery of the Relics New most patient and accurate investigations have been subsequent ly pursued, with a result that, relying on the judgment of worthy and prudent persons, We believe to be positive: The relics also of St. Peter have been identified in a manner that We cannot but accept as con vincing, and We give praise to those who have undertaken this most careful study and this long and heavy labour. 619 This will not exhaust the researches, verifications, discussions. But it seems a manifest duty on Our part, at this present point in the archaeo logical and scientific conclusions, to make this happy pronouncement to you and to the Church, obliged as we are to honour sacred relics which bear a serious proof of their authenticity, for they were at one time living members of Christ, temples of the Holy Spirit, destined for a glorious resurrection, (cf. Denz. Sch. 1822); and in the present instance we have tc be all the more solicitous, all the more exultant, seeing that now we have every reason to believe that there have been discovered the mortal remains, few it is true but sacrosanct, of the Prince of the Apostles, of Simon Barjona, of the Fisherman called by Christ Peter, of him who was chosen by Our Lord lo be the foundation of his Church, and to whom Our Lord confided the supreme keys of his kingdom together with the mission of feeding and uniting his flock, redeemed humanity, until His own final glorious return. Our Master and Protectors Dear children, let us invoke the martyr, apostle, bishop of Rome and of the Catholic Church, Peter, and with him Paul, the missionary, the doctor of the gentiles, the principal protagonist of the universality of the christian message, that from heaven both of them may be our Masters and our Protectors in our earthly pilgrimage. May the apostolic blessing, which comes to us from them, be fot you all productive of the most abundant graces of Jesus Christ. CREDO OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD Following is a translation of “The ‘Credo’ of the People of God” proclaimed by Pope Paul VI (June 30) at the closing of the Year of Faith during an open-air Mass in St. Peter’s square. With this solemn liturgy We end the celebration cf the nineteenth centenary of the martyrdom of the holy Apostles Pet:r and Paul, and thus close the Year of Faith. We dedicated it to the commemoration of the holy Apostles in order that We might give witness to Our stead fast will to be faithful to the Deposit of the faith1 which they trans mitted to Us, and that We might strengthen Our desire to live by it in the historical circumstances in which the Church finds herself in het pilgrimage in the midst of the world. 1 Cfr. 1 Tim. 6, 20. - Cfr. Lk 22, 32. We feel it Our duty to give public thanks to all who responded to our invitation by bestowing on the Year of Faith a splendid com pleteness through the deepening of their personal adhesion to the Word of God, through the renewal in various communities of the profession of faith, and through the testimony of a Christian life. To Our Bro thers in the Episcopate especially, and to all the faithful of the Holy Catholic Church, We express Our appreciation and We grant Our bless ingLikewise We deem that We must fulfil the mandate entrusted by Christ to Peter, whose successor We are, the last in merit; namely, to confirm Our brothers in the faith." With the awareness, certainly, of Our human weakness, yet with all the strength impressed on Our spirit by such a command, We shall accordingly make a profession of faith, pronounce a creed which, without being strictly speaking a dogmatic de621 finition, repeats in substance, with some developments called for by the spiritual condition of our time, the creed of Nicea, the creed of the immortal Tradition of the Holy Church of God. In making this profession, We are aware of the disquiet which agitates certain modern quarters with regard to the faith. They do not escape the influence of a world being profoundly changed in which so many certainties are being disputed or discussed. We see even Ca tholics allowing themselves to be seized by a kind of passion for change and novelty. The Church, most assuredly, has always the duty to carry on the effort to study more deeply and to present in a manner ever better adapted to successive generations the unfathomable mysteries of Gcd, rich for all in fruits of salvation. But at the same time be taken, while fulfilling the indispensable duty of research, to do no injury to the teachings of Christian doctrine. For that would be to give rise, as is unfortunatelv seen in these days, to disturbance and perplexity in many faithful souls. It is important in this respect to recall that, beyond scientifically verified phenomena, the intellect which God has given us reaches that which is, and not merely the subjective expression of the structures and development of consciousness; and, on the other hand, that the task of interpretation — of hermeneutics — is to try to understand and extri cate, while respecting the word expressed, the sense conveyed by a text, and not to recreate, in some fashion, this sense in accordance with arbitrary hypotheses. But above all, we place Our unshakable confidence in the Holy Spirit, the soul of the Church, and iri' theological faith upon which rests the life of the Mystical body. We know that souls await the word of the Vicar of Christ, and we respond to that expectation with the instructions which we regularly give. But today we are given an opportunity to make a more solemn utterance. On this day which is chosen to close the Year of Faith, on this Feast of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, We have wished to of fer to the living God the homage of a profession of faith. And as once at Caesarea Philippi the Apostle of the Twelve to make a true confes sion, beyond human opinions, of Christ as Son of the Living God, sc 622 today his humble Successor, Pastor of the Universal Church raises his voice to give, on behalf of all the People of God, a firm witness to the divine Truth entrusted to the Church to be announced to all na tions. We have wished Our profession of faith to be to a high degree complete and explicit, in order that it may respond in a fitting way to the need of light felt by so many faithful souls, and by all those in the world, to whatever spiritual family they belong, who are in search of the Truth. To the glory of God Most Holy and of Our Lord Jesus Christ, trusting in the aid of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of the Holy Apostles Peter and edification of the Church, in the name of all the Pastors and all the faithful, we now pronounce this profession of faith, in full spiritual communion with you all, beloved Brothers and sons. PROFESSION OF FAITH We believe in one only God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Creator of things visible such as this world in which our transient life passes, of things invisible such as the pure spirit which are also called angels,' and Creator in each man of his spiritual and immortal soul. We believe that this only God is absolutely one in His infinitely holy essence as also in all His perfections, in His omnipotence, His infinite knowledge, His providence, His will and His love. He is He Who Is, as He revealed to Moses;1 and He is Love, as the Apostle John teaches us:5 so that these two names, Being and Love, express ineffably the same divine Reality of Him Who has wished to make Himself know to us, and Who “dwelling in light inaccessible,”0 is in Himself above every name, above every thing and above every created intellect. God alone can give us right and full knowledge of this Reality by revealing Himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in Whose 1 Cfr. Dz. — Sch. 3002. * Cfr. Ex. 3, 14. ’ Cfr. 1 Jn. 4, 8. 0 Cfr. 1 Tim. 6, 16. 623 Eternal Life we are by grace called to share, here below in the obscurity of faith and after death in eternal light. The mutual bonds which eternally constitute the Three Persons, Who are each one and the same Divine Being, are the blessed in most life of God Thrice Holy, infinitely beyond all that we can conceive in human measure.' We give thanks, however, to the Divine Goodness that very many believers can testify with us before men to the Unity of God, even though they know not the Mystery of the Most Holy Trinity. We believe then in the Father who eternally begets the Son, in the Son, the Word of God, who is eternally begotten, in the Holy Spirit, the uncreated Person who proceeds from the Father and the Son as their eternal Love. Thus in the Three Divine Persons, coaeternae sibi et coaequales, the life and beatitude of God perfectly One super abound and are consummated in the supreme excellence and glory pro per to uncreated Being, and always “there should be venerated Unity in the Trinity and Trinity in the Unity.”9 * * • Cfr. Dz. Sch. 804. " Cfr. Dz. - Sch. 75. "Cfr. Dz. - Sch. 75. "’Cfr. Dz. -- Sch. 150. "Cfl. Dz. - Sch. 76. 12 Cfr. Ibid. We believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the Son of God. He is the Eternal Word, born of the Father before time began, and one in substance with the Father, homoousios to Patri,"’ and through Him all things were made. He was incarnate of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, and was made man: equal therefore to the Father according to His divinity, and inferior to the Father ac cording to His humanity,11 and Himself one, not bv seme impossible confusion of His natures, but bv the unity of His person.12 He dwelt among us, full of grace and truth. He proclaimed and established the Kingdom of God and made us know in Himself the Father. He gave us His new commandment to love one another as He loved us. He taught us the wav of the Beatitudes of the Gospel: poverty in spirit, meekness, suffering borne with patience, thirst after justice, mercy, purity of heart, will for peace, persecution suffered fot 624 justice sake. Under Pontius Pilate He suffered, the Lamb of God bearing on Himself the sins of the world, and He died for us on the Cross, saving us by His redeeming Blood. He was buried, and, of His own power, rose the third day, raising us by His Resurrection to that sharing in the divine life which is the life of grace. He ascended to heaven, and He will come again, this time in glory, to judge the living and the dead: each according to his merits — those who have responded to the Love and Piety of God going to eternal life, those who have refused them to the end going to the fire that is not extin guished. And His Kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, who is Lord, and Giver of life, Whc is adored and glorified together with the Father and the Son. He spoke to us by the Prophets; He was sent by Christ after His Resur rection and His Ascension to the Father; He illuminates, vivifies, pro tects and guides the Church; He purifies the Church’s members if they do not shun His grace. His action, which penetrates to the inmost of the soul, enables man to respond to the call of Jesus: Be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect (Mt. 5, 48). We believe that Mary is the Mother, who remained ever a Virgin, of the Incarnate Word, our God and Saviour Jesus Christ,11 and that by reason of this singular election, she was, in consideration of the merits of her Son, redeemed in a more eminent manner,1'1 preserved from all stain of original sin1’’ and filled with the gift of grace more than a>l other creatures.”’ 1:1 Cfr. Dz. - Sch. 251-252. " Cfr. Lumen Gentium 53. '■Cfr. Dz. — Sch. 2803. 111 Cfr. Lumen Gentium 53. '"Cfr. Lumen Gentium 53, 58, 61. ”■ Cfr. Dz. — Sch. 3903. Joined by a close and indissoluble bond to the Mysteries of the Incarnation and Redemption,1' the Blessed Virgin, the Immaculate, was at the end of her earthly life raised body and soul to heavenly glory1' and likened to her risen Son in anticipation of the future lot of all * 111 625 the just; and we believe that the Blessed Mother of God, the New Eve, Mother of the Church,19 continues, in Heaven her maternal role with regard to Christ’s members, cooperating with the birth and growth cf divine life in the souls of the redeemed.2" We believe that in Adam all have sinned, which means that the original cffense committed by him caused human nature, common to all men, to fall to a state in which it bears the consequences of that offense, and which is not the state in which it was at first in our first parents, established as they were in holiness and justice, and in which man knew neither evil nor death. It is human nature so fallen, stripped of the grace that clothed it, injured in its own natural powers and subjected to the dominion of death, that is transmitted to all men, and it is in this sense that every man is born in sin. We therefore, hold, with the Council of Trent, that original sin is transmitted with human nature, “net bv imitation, but by propagation” and that it is thus “pro per to everyone.”21 We believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the Sacrifice of the cress redeemed us from original sin and all the personal sins commit ted by each one cf us, so that, in accordance with the word of the Apostle, “where sin abounded, grace did more abound.”22 We believe in one Baptism instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ for the remission cf sins. Baptism should be administered even to little children who have not yet been able to be guilty of any personal sin, in order that, though born deprived of supernatural grace, they may be reborn “of water and the Holy Spirit” to the divine life in Christ Jesus.”’ We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, built by Jesus Christ on that rock which is Peter. She is the Mystical Body of Cfr. Lumen Gentium, 53, 56, 61, 63; Cfr. Paul VI, Alloc, for the Closing of the Third Session of the Second Vatican Council: AAS l.VI (1964) 1016; Cfr. Exhort. Apost, Signum Magnum. Introd. Cfr. Lumen Gentium 63; Cfr. Paul VI Exhort, Anost, Signum Mao num, P. 1, n. 1. -'Cfr. Dz. Sch. 15'3. Cfr. Rom. 5, 20. -•Cfr. Dz. Sch. 1514. 626 Christ; at the same time a visible society instituted with hierarchical or gans, and a spiritual community; the Church on earth, the pilgrim Peo ple of God here below and the Church filled with heavenly blessings; the germ and the first fruits of the Kingdom of God, through which the work and the sufferings of Redemption are continued throughout human history, and which looks for its perfect accomplishment beyond time in glory.'4 In the course of time, the Lord Jesus forms His Church by means of the Sacraments emanating from His Plenitude.24 25 By these she makes her members participants in the Mystery of the Death and Resurrection of Christ, in the grace of the Holy Spirit who gives her life and movement.'G She is therefore holy, though she has sinners in her bosom, because she herself has no other life but that of grace: it is by living her life that her members are sanctified; it is by re moving themselves from her life that they fall into sins and disorders that prevent the radiation of her sanctity. This is why she suffers and dees penance for these offences, of which she has the power to heal her children through the Blood of Christ and the Gift of the Holy Spirit. 24 Cfr. Lumen Gentium 8 et 5. -’5 Cfr. Lumen Gentium 7, 11. 211 Cfr. Sacrosanctum Concilium 5, 6; Cfr. Lumen Gentium 7, 12. '-’7 Cfr. Dz. — 3011. Heiress of the divine promises and daughter of Abraham ac cording to the Spirit, through that Israel whose Scriptures she loving ly guards, and whose Patriarchs and Prophets she venerates; founded upon the Apostles and handing on from century to century their ever living word and their powers as Pastors in the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him; perpetually assisted by the Holy Spirit, she has the Holy Spirit, she has the charge of guarding, teach ing, explaining and spreading the Truth which God revealed in a then veiled manner by the Prophets, and fully by the Lord Jesus. We be lieve all that is contained in the Word of God written or handed down, and that the Church proposes for belief as divinely revealed, whether by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal magisterium.'1 We believe in the infallibility enjoyed by the Successor of Peter when 627 he teaches ex cathedra as Peter and Teachers of all Faithful,**’ and which is assured also to the Episcopal Body when it exercises with him the supreme magisterium.”9 We believe that the Church founded by Jesus Christ and for which He prayed is indefectiblv one in faith, worship and the bond of hierar chical communion. In the bosom of this Church, the rich variety of liturgical rites and the legitimate diversity of theological and spiritual heritages and special disciplines, far from injuring her unity make it more manifest."1 Recognising also the existence, outside the organism of the Church of Christ, of numerous elements of truth and sanctification which be long to her as her own and tend to Catholic unity,31 and believing in the action of the Holy Spirit who stirs up in the heart of the disciples of Christ love of this unity,32 We entertain the hope that the Chris tians who are not yet in the full communion of the one and only Church will one day he reunited in one Flock with one only Shepherd. We believe that the Church is necessary for salvation, because Christ, who is the sole Mediator and Way of salvation, renders Him self present for us in His Body which is the Church.33 But the divine Design of salvation embraces all men; and those who without fault on their part do not know the Gospel of Christ and His Church, but seek God sincerely, and under the influence of grace endeavour to do His will as recognised through the promptings of their conscience, they, in number known only to Gcd, can obtain salvation."1 We believe that the Mass, celebrated by the priest representing the person of Christ by virtue of the power received through the Sacrament of Orders, and offered by him in the name of Christ and the members of His Mystical Body, is the Sacrifice of Calvary rendered sacramentally present on our altars. We believe that as the bread and -"Cfr. Dz. Sch. 3074. Cfr. Lumen Gentium 25. 10 Cfr. Lumen Gentium 23; Cfr. Orientalium Licclesiarum 2, 3, 5, 6. u Cfr. Lumen Gentium 8. 12 Cfr. Lumen Gentium 15. Cfr. Lumen Gentium 14. " Cfr. Lumen Gentium 16. 628 wine consecrated by the Lord at the Last Supper were changed into His Body and His Blood which were to be offered for us on the Cross, likewise the bread and wine consecrated by the priest are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ enthroned gloriously in Heaven, and We believe that the mysterious presence of the Lord, under what con tinues to appear to cur senses as before, is a true, real and substantial presence. Christ cannct be thus present in this Sacrament except by the change into His Body of the reality itself of the bread and the change into His Blood of the reality of the wine, leaving unchanged only the properties of the bread and wine which our senses perceive. This mys terious change is very appropriately called by the Church transubstatitiation. Every theological explanation which seeks some understanding of this mystery must, in order to be in accord with Catholic faith, maintain that in the reality itself, independently of our mind, the bread and wine have ceased to exist after the Consecration, so that it is the adorable Body * 5nd Blood of the Lord Jesus that from then on are really before us under the sacramental species of bread and wine, '' as the Lord willed it, in order to give Himself to us as food and to associate us with the unity of His Mystical Body.1' The unique and indivisible existence of the Lord glorious in Hea ven is not multiplied, but is rendered present by the Sacrament in the many places on earth where Mass is celebrated. And this existence re mains present, after the Sacrifice, in the Blessed Sacrament which is, in the tabernacle, the living heart of each of cur churches. And it is our very sweet duty to honour and adore in the Blessed Host which our eyes see, the Incarnate Word, without leaving Heaven, is made present before us. We confess that the Kingdom of God begun here below in the Church of Christ is not of this world whose form is passing, and that 35 Cfr. Dz. — Sch. 1651. ;i,i Cfr. Dz. — Sch. 1642, 1651-1654; Paul VI, Enc. Mysterium Fidei. Cfr. S. Th., Ill, 13, 3. 629 its proper growth cannot be confounded with the progress of civiliza tion, of science or of human technology, but that it consists in an ever more profound knowledge of the unfathomable riches of Christ an ever stronger hope in eternal blessings, an ever more ardent response to the Love of God, and an ever more generous bestowal of grace and holiness among men. But it is this same love which induces the Church to concern herself constantly about the true temporal welfare of men. Without ceasing to recall to her children that they have not here a lasting dwelling, she also urges them to contribute, each according to his vocation and his means, to the welfare of their earthly city, to pro mote justice, peace and brotherhood among men, to give their aid freely to their brothers, especially to the poorest and most unfortunate The deep solicitude of the Church, the Spouse of Christ, for the needs of men, for their joys and hopes, their griefs and efforts, is therefore nothing other than her great desire to be present to them, in order tc illuminate them with the light of Christ and to gather them all in Him their only Saviour. This solicitude can never mean that the Church, conform herself to the things of his world, or that she lessen the ardour of her expectation of her Lord and of the eternal Kingdom. We believe in the life eternal. We believe that the souls of all those who die in the grace of Christ, whether they must still be puri fied in Purgatory, or whether from the moment they leave their bodies Jesus takes them to Paradise as He did for the Good Thief, are the People of God in the eternity beyond death, which will be finally con quered on the day of the Resurrection when these souls will be reunited with their bodies. We believe that the multitude of those gathered around Jesus and Mary in Paradise forms the Church of Heaven, where in eternal beati tude they see God as He is,ls and where they also, in different degrees, are associated with the holy Angels in the divine rule exercised by Christ in glory, interceding for us and helping our weakness by theit brotherly care.39 ■ls Cfr. 1 Jn. 3, 2; Dz. — Sch. 1000. •I!' Cfr. Lumen Gentium 49. 630 We believe in the communion of all the faithful of Christ, those who are pilgrims on earth, the dead who are attaining their purification, all together forming one Church; and we believe that in this com munion the merciful love of God and His Saints is ever listening to our prayers, as Jesus told us: Ask and you will receive.40 Thus it is Cfr. Lk. 10. 9-10: Jn. 16. 24. with faith and in hope that We look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Blessed be God Thrice Holy. Amen “HUM ANAE VITAE” Encyclical Letter of His Holiness POPE PAUL VI ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH TO THE VENERABLE PATRIARCH, ARCHBISHOPS AND BISHOPS AND OTHER LOCAL ORDINARIES IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE TO PRIESTS, THE FAITHFUL AND TO ALL MEN OF GOOD WILL VENERABLE BROTHERS AND BELOVED SONS The transmission of life 1. The most serious duty of transmitting human life, for which married persons are the free and responsible collaborators of God the Creator, has always been a source of great joys to them, even if some times accompanied bv not a few difficulties and bv distress. At all times the fulfilment of this duty has posed grave problems to the conscience of married persons, but, with the recent evolution of society, changes have taken place that give rise to new questions which the Church could not ignore, having to do with a matter which so closelv touches upon the life and happiness of men. 632 I. NEW ASPECTS OF THE PROBLEM AND COMPETENCY OF THE MAGISTERIUM New formulation of the problem 2. The changes which have taken place are in fact noteworthy and of varied kinds. In the first place, there is the rapid demographic development. Fear is shown by many that world population is growing more rapidly than the available resources, with growing distress to many families and developing countries, so that the temptation for Authori ties to counter this danger with radical measures is great. Moreovet, working and lodging conditions, as well as increased exigencies both in the economic field and in that of education, often make the proper education of an elevated number of children difficult today. A change is also seen both in the manner of considering the person of women and her place in society, and in the value to be attributed to conjugal love in marriage, and also in the appreciation to be made cf the mean ing of conjugal ^rcts in relation to that love. Finally and above all, man has made stupendous progress in the domination and rational organization of the forces of nature, such that he tends to extend this domination to his own total being: to the body, to psychical life, to social life and even to the laws which regulate the transmission of life. 3. This new state cf things gives rise to new questions. Granted the conditions of life today, and granted the meaning which conjugal relations have with respect to the harmony between husband and wife and to their mutual fidelity, would not a revision of the ethical norms in force up to now, seem to be advisable, especially when it is consi dered that they cannot be observed without sacrifices, sometimes heroic sacrifices? And again: by extending to this field the application of the socalled “principle of totality”, could it not be admitted that the intention of a less abundant but more rationalized fecundity might transform a materially sterilizing intervention into a licit and wise control of birth? Could it not be admitted, that is, that the finality of procreation per tains to the ensemble of conjugal life, rather than to its single acts? It is also asked whether, in view of the increased sense of responsibility 633 of modern man, the moment has not come for him to entrust to his reason and his will, rather than to the biological rhythms of his organ ism, the task of regulating birth. Competency of the Magisterium 4. Such questions required from the teaching authority of the Church a new and deeper reflection upon the principles of the moral teaching cn marriage: a teaching founded on the natural law, illuminated and enriched by divine Revelation. No believer will wish to deny that the teaching authority of the Church is competent to interpret even the natural moral law. It is, in fact, indisputable, as Our Predecessors have many times declared,* 1 that Jesus, when communicating to Peter and to the Apostles His divine authority and sending them to teach all nations His commandments/ constituted them as guardians and authentic interpreters of all the moral law, not only, that is, of the law of the gospel, but also of the natural fulfilment of which is equally necessarv for salvation.'1 1 Cf. Pius IX, Encyclical Qui Pluribus. 9, 1846; in Pn IX P. M. Acta. I. pp. 9-10; St. Pius X, Encyc. Singulari Quadam. Sept. 24, 1912; in AAS IV (1912), p. 658; Pius XI, Encyc. Casti Connubii, Dec. 31, 1930; in AAS XXII (1930), pp. 579-581; Pius XII, Allocution Magnificate Dominum to the Episcopate of the Catholic world, Nov. 1, 1954; in AAS XLVI (1954). pp. 671-672; John XXIII. Encyc. Mater et Magistra. May 15, 1961; in AAS kill (1961). p. 457. -Cf. Mt. 28:18-19. :,Cf. Mt. 7:21. 1 Cf. Catechisms Romanns Conctln Tndentsnt. Part II. Ch. VIII; Leo XIII, Encyc. Arcanum, Feb. 10, 1880; in Acta Leonis XIII, II (1881), pp. 26-2^ Pius XI. Encyc. Divini films Magistri, Dec. 31, 1929 in AAS XXII (1930), pp. 58-61; Encyc. Casti Connubii, in AAS XXII (1930), pp. 545 546; Pius XII, Alloc, to the Italian Medico-Biological Union of Saint Luke. Nov. 12. 1944 in Discorsi et Radiomessavi. VI, pp. 191-192; to the Italian Catholic Union of Midwives Oct. 29, 1951, in AAS XLIII (1951). pp. 857Conformably to this mission of hers, the Church has always pro vided—and even more amply in recent times—a coherent teaching con cerning both the nature of marriage and the correct use of conjugal rights and the duties of husband and wife.1 634 Special duties 5. The consciousness of that same mission induced Us to confinn and enlarge the Study Commission which Our Predecessor Pope John XXIII of happy memory had instituted in March, 1963. That Com mission which included, besides several experts in the various pertinent disciplines, also married couples, had as its scope the gathering of opin ions on the new question regarding conjugal life, and in particular on the regulation of births, and of furnishing opportune elements of in formation so that the Magisterium could give an adequate reply to the expectation not only of the faithful, but also of world opinion." The work of these experts, as well as the successive judgements and counsels spontaneously forwarded by or expressly requested from a good number of Our Brothers in the Episcopate, have permitted Us tc measure more exactly all the aspects of this complex matter. Hence with all Our heart We express to each of them Our lively gratitude. Reply of the Magisterium 6. The conclusions at which the Commission arrived could not, nevertheless, be considered by Us as definitive, nor dispense Us from a personal examination of this serious question; and this also because, within the Commission itself, no full concordance of judgements concerning the moral norms to be proposed had been reached, and above all because certain criteria of solutions had emerged which departed from the moral teaching on marriage proposed with constant firmness by the teaching authority of the Church. 859; to the Seventh Congress of the International Society of Haematology. Sept. 12, 1958, in AAS L (1958), pp. 734-735; John XXIII, Encyc., Mater et Magistra, in ASS LIII (1961), pp. 446-447; Codex Iuris Canonici, Canon 1067; Can. 1968, Sect. 1, Can. 1076 Sects. 1-2; Second Vatican Council, Pas toral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, Nos. 47-52. " Cf. Paul VI, Allocution to the Sacred College, June 23, 1964, in AAS LVI (1964) p. 588; to the Commission for Study of Problems of Population, Family and Birth, March 27, 1965, in AAS LVII (1965), p. 388; to the National Congjess of the Italian Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Oct. 29, 1966, in AAS LVIII (1966), p. 1168. 635 Therefore, having attentively sifted the documentation laid before Us, after mature reflection and assiduous prayers, We now intend, by virtue of the mandate entrusted to Us by Christ, to give Our reply to these grave questions. II. DOCTRINAL PRINCIPLES A total vision of man 7. The problem of birth, like every other problem regarding hu man life, is to be considered, beyond partial perspectives—whether of the biological or psychological, demographic or sociological orders—in the light of an integral vision of man and of his vocation, not only his na tural and earthly but also his supernatural and eternal vocation. And since, in the attempt to justify artificial methods of birth control, many have appealed to the demands both of conjugal love and of respon sible parenthood”, it is good to state very precisely the true concept of these two great realities of married life, referring principally to what was recently set forth in this regard, and in a highly authoritative form, by the Second Vatican Council in its Pastoral Constitution “Gaudium et Spes”. Conjugal love 8. Conjugal love reveals its true nature and nobility when it is considered in its supreme origin, God, Who is Love/’ “the Father, from Whom every family in heaven and on earth is named”.' Marriage is not, then, the effect of chance or the product of evo lution of unconscious natural forces; it is the wise institution of the Creator to realize in mankind His design of love. By means of the reciprocal personal gift of self, proper and exclusive to them, husband and wife tend towards the communion of their beings in view of mu tual personal perfection, to collaborate with God in the generation and education of new lives^ " Cf. I Jn. 4:8. 7Cf. Eph. 3:15. 636 For baptized persons, moreover, marriage invests the dignity of a sacramental sign of grace inasmuch as it represents the union of Christ and of the Church. Its characteristics 9. Under this light, there clearly appear the characteristic marks and demands of conjugal love, and it is of supreme importance to have an exact idea of these. This love is first of all fully human, that is to say, of the senses and of the spirit at the same time. It is not, then, a simple transport of instinct and sentiment, but also, and principally, an act of the free will, intended to endure and to grow by means of the joys and sorrows of daily life, in such a way that husband and wife become one only heart and one only soul, and together attain their human perfection. Then, this love is total, that is to say, it is a very special form of personal friendship, in which husband and wife generously share everything, without undue reservations or selfish calculations. Whoever truly loves his -Tnarriage partner loves not only for what he receives, but for the partner’s self, rejoicing that he can enrich his partner with the gift of himself. Again, this love is faithful and exclusive until death. Thus in fact do bride and groom conceive it to be on the day when they freely and in full awareness assume the duty of the marriage bond. A fide lity, this, which can sometimes be difficult, but is always possible, al ways noble and meritorious as no one can deny. The example of so many married persons down through the centuries shows, not only that fidelity is according to the nature of marriage, but also that it is a source of profound and lasting happiness. And finally, this love is fecund, fcr it is not exhausted by the communion between husband and wife, but is destined to continue, raising up new lives. “Marriage and conjugal love are by their na ture ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Chil dren are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very sub stantially to the welfare of their parents.”8 ■*' Cf. II Vat. Council, Pastoral Const. Gaudium et Spes, No. 50. 637 Responsible parenthood 10. Hence conjugal love requires in husband and wife an aware ness of their mission of “responsible parenthood,” which today is rightly much insisted upon, and which also must be exactly understood. Conse quently it is to be considered under different aspects which are legiti mate and connected with one another. In relation to the biological processes, responsible parenthood means the knowledge and respect of their functions; human intellect discovers in the power of giving life biological laws which are part of the hu man person.11 " Cf. St. Thomas, Summa Theologica. I ll, Q. 94, Art. 2. "’Cf. Pastoral Const. Gaudium cl Spes. Nos. 50. 51. In relation to the tendencies of instinct or passion, responsible pa renthood means that necessary dominion which reason and will must exercise over them. In relation to physical, economic, psychological and social condi tions, responsible parenthood is exercised, either by the deliberate and generous decision to raise a numerous family, or by the decision, made for grace motives and with due respect for the moral law, to avoid for the time being or even for an indeterminate period, a new birth. Responsible parenthood also and above all implies a more pro found relationship to the objective moral order established by God, of which a right conscience is the faithful interpreter. The responsible exer cise of parenthood implies, therefore, that husband and wife recognize fully their own duties towards God, towards themselves, towards the family and towards society, in a correct hierarchy of values. In the task of transmitting life, therefore, they are not free to pro ceed completely at will, as if they could determine in a wholly autono mous way the honest path to follow; but they must conform their ac tivity to the creative intention of God, expressed in the very nature of marriage and of its acts, and manifested by the constant teaching of the Church.10 638 Respect for the nature and purposes of the marriage act 11. These acts, by which husband and wife are united in chaste intimacy, and by means of which human life is transmitted, are, as the Council recalled, “noble and worthy,”11 and they do not cease to be law ful if, for causes independent of the will of husband and wife, they are foreseen to be infecund, since they always remain ordained towards expressing and consolidating their union. In fact, as experience bears witness, not every conjugal act is followed by a new life. God has wisely disposed natural laws and rhythms of fecundity which of them selves cause a separation in the succession in births. Nonetheless the Church, calling men back to the observance of the norms of the na tural law, as interpreted by her constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marriage act (quilibet mdtrimoni ttsus) must remain open to the transmission of life.0" 11 Ibid., No. 49. 12 Cf. Pius XI, Encyc. Casti Connubii, in AAS XXII (1930), p. *560: Pius XII, in AAS XLIII (1951), p. 843. Two inseparable aspects: Union and procreation 12. That teaching, often set forth by the Magisterium, is founded upon the inseparable connection willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the con jugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning. Indeed, by its intimate structure, the conjugal act, while most closely uniting husband and wife, capacitates them for the generation of new lives, ac cording to laws inscribed in the very being of man and of woman. By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fulness the sense of true mutual love and its ordination towards man’s most high calling to parenthood. We believe that the men of our day are particularly capable of seizing the deeply reasonable and human character of this fundamental principle. Faithfulness to God’s design 13. It is in fact justly observed that a conjugal act imposed upon one’s partner without regard for his or her condition and lawful desires 11 12 639 is not a true act of love, and therefore denies an exigency of right mo ral order in the relationships between husband and wife. Hence, one who reflects well must also recognize that a reciprocal act of love, which jeopardizes, the disponibility to transmit life which God the Creator, according to particular laws, inserted therein, is in contradiction with the design constitutive of marriage, and with the will of the Author of life. To use this divine gift destroying, even if only partially, its meaning and its purpose is to contradict the nature both of man and of woman and of their most intimate relationship, and therefore it is to contradict also the plan of God and His will. On the other hand, to make use of the gift of conjugal love while respecting the laws of the generative process means to acknowledge oneself not to be the ar biter of the sources of human life, but rather the minister of the design established by the Creator. In fact, just as man does not have unlimited dominion over his body in general, so also, with particular reason, he has no such dominion over his generative faculties as such, because of their intrinsic ordination towards raising up life, of which God is the principle. “Human life is sacred,” Pope John XXIII recalled: “from its very inception it reveals the creating hand of God. ’13 illicit ways of regulating birth 14. In conformity with these landmarks in the human and Chris tian vision of marriage, We must once again declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun, and, above all. directly willed and procured abortion, even if for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as licit means of regulating birth?1 Equally to be excluded, as the teaching authority of the Church has frequently declared, is direct sterilization, whether perpetual or tern ,:l Cf. John XXIII, Encyc. Mater et Maystra, in AAS LIII (1961). p. 477. H Cf. Catechistmus Romanus Concdii 1 ridentini, Part. II, ch. VIII; Pius XI, Encyc. Casti Connubii, in AAS XXII (1930), pp. 562-564; Pius XII. Diseorsi e Radiomessagi, VI (1944), pp. 191-192; AAS XLIII (1951), pp. 842-843; pp. 857-859; John XXIII, Encyc. Paeem in Terris, Apr. 11, 1963. in AAS LV (1963), pp. 259-260; Gaudium et Spes. No. 51. 640 porary, whether of the man or of the woman.1" Similarly excluded is every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, pro poses, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impos sible."1 '■Cf. Pius XI, Encyc. C.asti Connubii. in AAS XXII (1930), p. 565: Decree of the Holy Office, Feb. 22, 1940, in AAS L (1958), pp. 734-735. lfi Cf. Catechismus Romanus Concilii Triientini, Part II, Ch. VIII; Pius XI, Encyc. Casti Connubii, in AAS XXII (1930), pp. 559-561; Pius XII. AAS XLIII (1951), p. 843; AAS L (1958), pp. 734-735; John XXIII. Encyc. Mdter et Magistra. in AAS LIII (1961), p. 447. 17 Cf. Pius XII, Alloc, to the National Congress of the Union of Catholic Jurists Dec. 6, 1953, in AAS XLV (1953), pp. 798-799. lsCg. Rom., 3, 8. 111 Cf. Pius XII, Alloc, to Congress of the Italian Association of Urology. Oct. 8, 1953, in AAS XLV (1953), pp. 674-675; AAS L (1958), pp. 734-735. To justify conjugal acts made intentionally infecund, one cannot invoke as valid reasons the lesser evil, or the fact that such acts would constitute a whole together with the fecund acts already performed or to follow later, and hence would share in one and the same moral goodness. In truth, if it is sometimes licit to tolerate a lesser evil in order to avoid a greater evil or to promote a greater good,1' it is not licit, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil so that good may follow therefrom;ls that is, to make into the object of a positive act of the will something which is intrinsically disorder, and hence unworthy of the human person, even when the intention is to safeguard or promote in dividual, family or social well-being. Consequently it is an error to think that a conjugal act which is deliberately made infecund and so is in trinsically dishonest could be made honest and right by the ensemble of a fecund conjugal life. Licitness of therapeutic means 15. The Church, on the contrary, does not at all consider illicit the use of those therapeutic means truly necessary to cure diseases of the organism, even if an impediment to procreation, which may be fore seen, should result therefrom, provided such impediment is not, for whatever motive, directlv willed.* 17 * 19 641 Licitness of recourse to infecund periods 16. To this teaching of the Church on conjugal morals, the ob jection is made today, as We observed earlier (No. 3), that it is the prerogative of the human intellect to dominate the energies offered by irrational nature and to orientate them towards an end conformable to the good of man. Now, some may ask: In the present case, is it not reasonable in many circumstances to have recourse to artificial birth control if, thereby, we secure the harmony and peace of the family, and better conditions for the education of the children already born? To this question it is necessary to reply with clarity: The Church is the first to praise and recommend the intervention of intelligence in a function which so closely associates the rational creature with his Creator: but she affirms that this must be done with respect for the order es tablished by God. If, then, there are serious motives to space out births, which derive from the physical or psychological conditions of husband and wife, oi from external conditions, the Church teaches that it is then licit to take into account the natural rhythms immanent in the generative functions, for the use of marriage in the infecund periods only, and in this way to regulate birth without offending the moral principles which have been recalled earlier."’0 The Church is coherent with herself when she considers recourse to the infecund periods to be licit, while at the same time condemning as being always illicit, the use of means directly contrary to fecunda tion, even if such use is inspired by reasons which may appear honest and serious. In reality, there arc essential differences between the twe cases: in the former, the married couple make legitimate use of a na tural disposition; in the latter, they impede the development of natural processes. It is true that, in the one and the other case, the married couple are concordant in the positive will of avoiding children for plau sible reasons, seeking the certainty that offspring will not arrive; but it is also true that only in the former case are they able to renounce tlu use of marriage in the fecund periods when, for just motives, procrea -"Cf. Pius XII, AAS XLIIf (1951), p. 846. 642 lion is not desirable, while making use of it during infecund periods to manifest their affection and to safeguard their mutual fidelity. By so doing, they give proof of a truly and integrally honest love. Grave consequences of methods of artificial birth control 17. Upright men can even better convince themselves of the solid grounds on which the teaching of the Church in this field is based, il they care to reflect upon the consequences of methods of artificial birth control. Let them consider, first of all, how wide and easy a road would thus be opened up towards ’ conjugal infidelity and the general 'lowering of morality. Not much experience is needed in order to know human weakness, and to understand that men—especially the young, who are so vulnerable on this point—have need of encouragement to be faithful to the moral law, so that they must not be offered some easy means of eluding its observance. It is also to be feared that the man. growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may final ly lose respect for the woman and no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion. Let it be considered also that a dangerous weapon.would thus be placed in the hands of those public Authorities who take no heed of moral exigencies. Who could blame a Government for applying to the solution of the problems of the community those means acknowledged to be licit for married couple in the solution of a family problem? Who will stop rulers from favouring, from even imposing upon their peoples, if they were to consider it necessary, the method of contraception which they judge to be most efficacious? In such a way men, wishing to avoid individual, family, or social difficulties encountered in the observance of the divine law, would reach the point of placing at the mercy of the intervention of public Authorities the most personal and most re served sector of conjugal intimacy. Consequently, if the mission of generating life is not to be exposed to the arbitrary will of men, one must necessarily recognize insurmount 643 able limits to the possibility of man’s domination over his own body and its functoins; limits which no man, whether a private individual or one invested with authority, may licitly surpass. And such limits cannot be determined otherwise than by the respect due to the integrity of the human organism and its functions, according to the principles recalled earlier, and also according to the correct understanding ol the “principle of totality” illustrated bv Our Predecessor Pope Pius XII.-’’ The Church guarantor of true human values 18. It can be foreseen that this teaching will perhaps not be easily received by all: too numerous are those voices—amplified by the mo dern means of propaganda—which are contrary to the voice of the Church. To tell the truth, the Church is not surprised to be made, like her divine Founder, a “sign of contradiction”;22 yet she does not because of this cease to proclaim with humble firmness the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical. Of such laws the Church was not the author, nor consequently can she be their arbiter; she is only theit depositary and their interpreter, without ever being able to declare tc be licit that which is not so by reason of its intimate and unchange able opposition to the true good of man. In defending conjugal morals in their integral wholeness, the Church knows that she contributes towards the establishment of a truly human civilization; she engages man not to abdicate from his own res ponsibility in order to rely on technical means; by that very fact she defends the dignity of man and wife. Faithful to both the teaching and the example of the Saviour, she show herself to be the sincere and disinterested friend of men, whom she wishes to help, even during theit earthly sojourn, “to share as sons in the life of the living God, the Father of all men.”2" -'Cf. AAS XLV (1953), pp. 674-675; AAS XLVIII (1956), pp. 461-462. Cf. Lk, 2, 34. -Cf. Paul VI. l-ncvc. Potmlonm PT<>KrcSflt>. March 26. 1967, No. 21. 644 III. PASTORAL DIRECTIVES The Church Mater et Magistra 19. Our words would not be an adequate expression of the thought and solicitude of the Church, Mother and Teacher of all peoples, if. after having recalled men to the observance and respect of the divine law regarding matrimony, We did not strengthen them in the path of honest regulation of birth, even amid the difficult conditions which to day afflict families and people. The Church, in fact, cannot have a different conduct towards men than that of the Redeemer: she knows their weaknesses, has compassion on the crowd, receives sinners; but she cannot renounce the teaching of the law which is, in reality, that law proper to a human life restored to its original truth and conducted by the Spirit of God/' Though We are thinking also of all men of gcod will, We now address Ourself particularly to Our sons, from whom We expect a prompter and more generous adherence. Possibility of observing the divine law 20. The teaching of the Church on the regulation of birth, which promulgates the divine law, will easily appear to many to be difficult or even impossible of actuation. And indeed, like all great beneficent realities, it demands serious engagement and much effort, individual, fa mily and social effort. More than that, it would not be practicable without the help of God, Who upholds and strengthens the good will of men. Yet, to anyone who reflects well, it cannot but be clear that such efforts ennoble man and are beneficial to the human community. Mastery of self 21. The honest practice of regulation of birth demands first of all that husband and wife acquire and possess solid convictions concern ing the true values of life and of the family, and that they tend towards securing perfect self-mastery. To dominate instinct by means of one’s reason and free will undoubtedly requires ascetical practices, so that the affective manifestations of conjugal life may observe the correct or21 Cf. Rom.. 8. 645 der, in particular with regard to the observance of periodic continence. Yet this discipline which is proper to the purity of married couples, far from harming conjugal love, rather confers on it a higher human value. It demands continual effort yet, thanks to its beneficent in fluence, husband and wife fully develop their personalities, being en riched with spiritual values. Such discipline bestows upon family life fruits of serenity and peace, and facilitates the solution of other pro blems; it favours attention for one’s partner, helps both parties to drive out selfishness, the enemy of true love; and deepens their sense of responsibility. By its means, parents acquire the capacity of having a deeper and more efficacious influence in the education of their off spring; little children and youths grow up with a just appraisal of human values, and in the serene and harmonious development of their spiritual and sensitive faculties. Creating atmosphere favourable to chastity 22. On this occasion, We wish to draw the attention of educators, and of all who perform duties of responsibility in regard to the com mon good of human society, to the need of creating an atmosphere favourable to education in chastity, that is, to the triumph of healths liberty over licence by means of respect for the moral order. Everything in the modern media of social communications which leads to sense excitation and unbridled customs, as well as every form of pornography and licentious performances, must arouse the frank and unanimous reaction of all those who are solicitous for the progress of civilization and the defence of the supreme good of the human spirit. Vainly would one seek to justify such depravation with the pretext of artistic or scientific exigencies,"' or to deduce an argument from the freedom allowed in this sector by the public Authorities. Appeal to public Authorities 23. To rulers, who are those principally responsible for the com mon good, and who can do so much to safeguard moral customs, We -'•''Cf. II Vatican Council, Decree biter Minjica on the media of Social Communication. Nos. 6-7. 646 say: Do not allow the morality of your peoples to be degraded; do not permit that by legal means practices contrary to the natural and divine law be introduced into that fundamental cell, the family. Quite other is the way in which public Authorities can and must contribute to the solution of the demographic problem: namely, the way of a provident policy for the family, of a wise education of peoples in res pect of the moral law and the liberty of citizens. We are well aware of the serious difficulties experienced by public Authorities in this regard, especially in the developing countries. To their legitimate preoccupations We devoted Our Encyclical Letter “Populorum Progressio”. But, with Our Predecessor Pope John XXIII, We repeat: No solution to these difficulties is acceptable “which does violence to man’s essential dignity” and is based only “on an utterly materialistic conception of man himself and of his life. The only pos sible solution to this question is one which envisages the social and economic progress both of individuals and of the whole of human so ciety, and which respects and promotes true human values.”20 Neither can one, withoufgrave injustice, consider divine Providence to be res ponsible for what depends, instead, on a lack of wisdom in government, on an insufficient sense of social justice, on selfish monopolization, or again on blameworthy indolence in confronting the efforts and the sac rifices necessary to ensure the raising of living standards of a people and of all its sons.2' 20 Cf. Encyc. Mater et Magistra, in AAS LIII (1961), p. 447. Cf. Encyc. Populorum Progretsio, Nos. 48-55. May all responsible public Authorities—as some are already doing so laudably—generously revive their efforts. And may mutual aid be tween all the members of the great human family never cease to grow: this is an almost limitless field which thus opens up to the activity of the great international organizations. To men of science 24. We wish now to express Our encouragement to men of science, who “can considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family, along with peace of conscience, if by pooling their efforts they labour 647 to explain more thoroughly the various conditions favoring a proper regulation of births.”28 It is particularly desirable that, according to the wish already expressed by Pope Pius XII, medical science succeed in providing a sufficiently secure basis for a regulation of birth, founded on the observance of natural rhythms.29 In this way, scientists and especially Catholic scientists will contribute to demonstrate in actual fact that, as the Church teaches, “a true contradiction cannot exist between the divine laws pertaining to the transmission of life and those pertaining to the fostering of authentic conjugal love”.10 To Christian husband and wives 25. And now Our words more directly address Our own children, particularly those whom God calls to serve Him in marriage. The Church, while teaching imprescriptible demands of the divine law, an nounces the tidings of salvation, and by means of the Sacraments opens up the paths of grace, which makes man a new creature, capable of corresponding with love and true freedom to the design of his Creator and Savior, and of finding the yoke of Christ to be sweet. ’1 Christian married couple, then, docile to her voice, must remember that their Christian vocation, which began at baptism, is further specified and reinforced by the Sacrament of Matrimony. By it husband and wife are strengthened and as it were consecrated for the faithful accom plishment of their proper duties, for the carrying out of their proper vocation even to perfection, and the Christian witness which is proper to them before the whole world.* " To them the Lord entrusts the task of making visible to men the holiness and sweetness of the law which unites the mutual love of husband and wife with their cooperation with the love of God the Author of human life. -s Cf. Pastoral Const. Gaudium et Spes, No. 52. Cf. AAS XLIII (1951), p. 859. "’Cf. Pastoral Const. Gaudium et Spes, No. 51. “ Cf. Mt. 11, 30. Cf. Pastoral Const. Gaudium et Spes, No. No. 48; II Vatican Council. Dogmatic Const. Lumen Gentium, No. 35. 648 We do not at all intend to hide the sometimes serious difficulties inherent in the life of Christian married persons; for them as for every one else, “the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life”.'13 But the hope of that life must illuminate their way, as with courage they strive to live with wisdom, justice and piety in this present time,* 34 * * 37 knowing that the figure of this world passes away.3" 3:1 Mt. 7, 14, cf. Hebr., 12, 11. 34 Cf. Tit. 2, 12. ‘•'■Cf. I Cor., 7, 31. “« Cf. Rom., 5, 5. 37 Eph., 5, 25, 28-29, 32-33. Let married couples, then, face up to the efforts needed, supported by the faith and hope which “do not disappoint. . because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, Who has been given to us”;30 let them implore divine assistance by persevering prayer; above all, let them draw from the source of grace and charity in the Eucharist. And if sin should still keep its hold over them, let them not be discouraged, but rather have recourse with humble perse verance to the mercy of God, which is poured forth in the Sacrament of Penance. In this way they will be enabled to achieve the fulness of conjugal life described by the Apostle: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved die Church.. .Husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the Church. . . This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church. However, let each one of you love his wife as him self, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”3' Apostolate in homes 26. Among the fruits which ripen forth from a generous effort of fidelity to the divine law, one of the most precious is that married couples themselves not infrequently feel the desire to communicate their experience to others. Thus there comes to be included in the vast pat tern of the vocation of the laity a new and most noteworthy form of the apostolate of like to like: it is married couples themselves who be come apostles and guides to other married couples. This is assuredly, 649 among so many forms of apostolate one of those which seem must op portune today.’” To doctors and medical personnel 27. We hold those physicians and medical personnel in the highest esteem who, in the exercise of their profession, value above every hu man interest the superior demands of their Christian vocation. Let them persevere, therefore, in promoting on every occasion the discovery of solutions inspired by faith and right reason, let them strive to arouse this conviction and this respect in their associates. Let them also con sider as their proper professional duty the task of acquiring all the knowledge needed in this delicate sector, so as to be able to give to those married persons who consult them wise counsel and healthy di rection. such as they have a right to expect. To Priests 28. Beloved priest sons, by vocation you are the counsellors and spiritual guides of individual persons and of families. We now turn to you with confidence. Your first task—especially in the case of those who teach moral theology—is to expound the Church’s teaching on mar riage without ambiguity. Be the first to give, in the exercise of your ministry, the example of loyal internal and external obedience to the teaching authority of the Church. That obedience, as you know well, obliges not only because of the reasons adduced, but rather because of the light of the Holy Spirit, which is given in a particular way to the Pastors of the Church in order that they may illustrate the truth.39 You know, too, that it is of the utmost importance, for peace of con sciences and for the unity of the Christian people, that in the field of morals as well as in that of dogma, all should attend to the Magisterium of the Church, and all should speak the same language. Hence, with all Our heart We renew to you the heartfelt plea of the great Apostle Paul: “I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of Our Lord :,s Cf. Dogmatic Const. Lumen Gentium, Nos. 35 and 41; Pastoral Const. Gaudium et Spes. Nos. 48-49, II Vatican Council, Decree Apostolicam Actuositatem, No. 11. 39 Cf. Dogmatic Const. Lumen Gentium, No. 25. 650 Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgement.”10 29. To diminish in no way the saving teaching of Christ consti tutes an eminent form of charity for souls. But this must ever be ac companied by patience and goodness, such as the Lord Himself gave example of in dealing with men. Having come not to condemn but to save/1 He was indeed intransigent with evil, but merciful towards individuals. In their difficulties, may married couples always finds, in the words and in the heart of a priest, the echo of the voice and the love of the Redeemer. To Bishops Beloved and Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate, with whom We most intimately share the solicitude of the spiritual good of the People of God, at the conclusion of this Encyclical Our reverent and affec tionate thoughts turn to you. To all of you We extend an urgent invitation. At the head .of the priests, your collaborators, and of your faithful, work ardently and incessantly for the safeguarding and the holiness of marriage, so that it may always be lived in its entire hu man and Christian fulness. Consider this mission as one of your most urgent responsibilities at the present time. As you know, it implies concerted pastoral action in all the fields of human activity, economic, cultural and social; for, in fact, only a simultaneous improvement in these various sectors will make it possible to render the life of parents and of children within their families not only tolerable, but easier and more joyous, to render the living together in human society more fra ternal and peaceful, in faithfulness to God’s design for the world. 40 Cf. I Cor., 1, 10. •" Cf. Jn., 3, 17. 651 FINAL APPEAL 31. Venerable Brothers, most beloved sons, and all men of good will, great indeed is the work of education, of progress and of love to which We call you, upon the foundation of the Church’s teaching, of which the Successor of Peter is, together with His Brothers in the Episcopate, the depositary and interpreter. Truly a great work, as We are deeply convinced, both for the world and for the Church, since man cannot find true happiness—towards which he aspires with all his being—other than in respect of the laws written by God in his ven nature, laws which he must observe with intelligence and love. Upon this work, and upon all of you, and especially upon married couples, We invoke the abundant graces of the God of holiness and mercy, and in pledge thereof We impart to you all Our Apostolic Blessing. Given at Rome, from Saint Peter's, this twenty-fifth day of July, Feast of Saint James the Apostle, in the year nineteen hundred and sixty-eight, the sixth of Our Pontificate. Paulus PP. VI wnwiSH CONSTITUTION ON REVISION OF ORDINATION RITES Following is a translation of Pontificalis Romani, the Aposto lic constitution issued on June 18 in which the revision of the rites of ordination and conservation were announced. The Second Vatican Council prescribed the revision of the Roman Pontifical not only in a general way1 but also with special indications which lay down the reform of the Rite of Ordinations in the ceremonies as well as in the texts”’. Among the rites of Ordination, those must be considered above all which through die conferral of the sacrament of the Orders in the various grades, constitute the sacred Hierarchy: “The divinely established ec clesiastical ministry is exercised on different levels by those who from an tiquity have been called bishops, priests and deacons”". In the revision of the rites of sacred Ordinations, in addition to the general principles of the Second Vatican Council for the general revision of liturgy, the admirable teaching must be kept in mind on the nature and the effects of the Order, affirmed by the Council itself in the Cons titution on the Church. This teaching must be expressed bv liturgy in the manner which is its own; indeed “both texts and rites should be drawn up so that they express more clearly the holy things which they signify. Christian people, as far as possible, should be able to understand them with ease and to take part in them fully, actively and as befits a com munity”1. The sacred council teaches, in fact, that “by episcopal consecration there is conferred the fullness of the sacrament of orders, that fullness which in the Church’s liturgical practice and in the language of the holy Fathers of the Church is undoubtedly called the high priesthood, the apex of the sacred ministry. 653 “But episcopal consecration, together with the office of sanctifying, also confers the office of teaching and of governing. (These however, of their very nature, can be exercised only in hierarchical communion with the head and the members of the college). For from tradition, which is expressed especially in liturgical rites and in the practice of the Church both of the East and of the West, it is clear that, by means of the im position of the hands and the words of consecration, the grace of the Holy Spirit is so conferred, and the sacred character so impressed, that bishops in an eminent and visible way undertake Christ’s own role as Teacher, Shepherd and High Priest, and that they act in His person”'. To these words many other excellent points of doctrine are to be added on the apostolic succession of the bishops and on their offices and duties which, although they are contained in the rite of the episcopal Consecration, appear as if they should be expressed better and with greater precision. For this purpose it seemed fitting to draw from ancient founts the prayer of consecration which is found in the so-called “Traditio apostolica” by St. Hyppolitus, written at the beginning of the third century, most of which is retained, even in our days, in the Ordination liturgy of the Copts and of the Syrian-Eastern Church. Thus, in the very moment of Ordination the convergence of the Eastern and of the Western tradi tion regarding the apostolic office of the bishops is affirmed. Among matters treated at the second Vatican Council regarding priests, we recall this above all; “Although priests do not possess the highest degree of the priesthood, and although they are dependent on the bishops in the exercise of their power, they are nevertheless united with the bishops in sacerdotal dignity. By' the power of the sacrament of orders and in the image of Christ the eternal High Priest (Heb. 5:1; 7:24; 1:11-28), they are consecrated to preach the Gospel, shepherd the faithful and celebrate divine worship as true priests of the New Testament”1'. It is stated further: “By sacred ordination and by the mission they receive from their bishops, priests are promoted to the service of Christ, the Teacher, the Priest and the King. They share in His ministry of unceasingly building up the Church on earth into the People of God, the Body of Christ, and the Temple of the Holy Spi rit”7. 654 In priestly ordination in accordance with the rite of the Roman Pon tifical, the mission and the grace of priesthood as the cooperator of the episcopal order were very clearly expressed. It seemed necessary, how ever, to give greater unity to the entire rite, and to give greater prom inence to the central nucleus of Ordination, that is to say, the imposition of the hands and the consecration prayer. As regards the deacons, lastly, in addition to what is stated in our Motu Proprio of June 18, 1967, the words of the “Lumen Gentium” Constitution must be remembered above all: “At a lower level of the hierarchy are the deacons upon whom hands are imposed” not unto the priesthood, but unto a ministry of service (Constitutiones Ecclesiae Aegpiacae, III, 2). For, strengthened by sacramental grace, in commu nion with the bishop and his group of priests, they serve the People of God in the ministry of the Liturgy, of the world and of charity”’. In the rite of the Ordination of deacons, there was little to be changed, in consideration of the new legislation of the deaconate as a separate and permanent grade of the hierarchy in the Latin Church and of the greater Clarity and simplicity of the rite. Moreover, among the documents of the supreme magisterium of the sacred Orders particular mention is due to the Apostolic Constitution “Sacramentum Ordinis” of our predecessor Pius XII, published on No vember 30, 1947, in which it is declared that “the essential matter of the .-acred Orders of the deaconate, of priesthood and of the episcopate is the imposition of hands and the single form are the words which deter mine the application of this matter and which clearly express the sacra mental. effects, that is to say, the power of Orders and used by the Church9. After this premise, the same document establishes which im position of hands and which words constitute the matter and the form of each Order. Since in the revision of the rite it has been necessary to add, remove or alter something, either in order to restore faithfulness to the most ancient documents to the texts, or to make the expressions clearer or yet to express better the effect of the sacraments it is necessary in order to avoid any controversy or reasons for the disturbance of consciences, to declare which parts of the reformed rite are to be regarded as essential. 655 Therefore, by our supreme apostolic authority, we decide and esta blish the following regarding the matter and the form of each Order. The matter of the Ordination of the deacons is the imposition of hands of the bishop, made in silence to each of those to be ordained, before the consecratory prayer. The form is constituted by the same consecratory prayer, of which the essential words—and therefore required for validity—are: “Emitte in eos, Domine, quaesumus, Spiritum Sanc tum, quo in opus ministerii fideliter exsequendi tnunere septiformis tuae gratiae roborentur.” Likewise, the matter of the ordination of priests is the imposition of hands made in silence by the bishop to each of those to be ordained before the consecratory prayer. The form is constituted by the same con secratory prayer, of which the essential words, and therefore required for validity, are: “Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Pater, his famulis tuis Presbyterii dignitatem; innova in visceribus eorum Spiritum sanctitatis; acceptum a te, Deus secundi meriti munis obtineant, cencensuramque morum cxemplo suae conversationis insinuent.” Finally, the matter of the Ordination of the bishop is the imposi tion of hands on the head of the bishop-elect, made in silence by the consecrating bishops, or at least principal consecrator, before the con secratory prayer. The form is constituted by the words of the same consecratory prayer, of which the essential, and therefore required for validity, is: “Et nunc effunde super hunc Efectum earn virtutem, quae a te est, Spiritum principalem, quern dedisti dilecto Filio Tuo Jesu Christo, quern Ipse donavit sanctis Apostolis, qui constituerunt Ecclesiam per sin gula loca, ut sanctuarium tuum, in gloriam et laudem indeficientem no minis tui.” Therefore, the rite for the conferral of the sacred Orders of the dea conate, of priesthood and of the episcopate revised by the “Consilium ad Exscquendam Constitutione de Sacra Liturgia” “with the help of compe tent persons and with the advice of the bishops of various parts of the world”10, is approved by us with our apostolic authority and establish that it henceforth be used in the administration of these orders instead of the one contained in the Roman Pontifical. 656 What we have here established and ordered we wish to remain valid and effective now and in the future notwithstanding anything that may be contrary in the Constitutions and in the Apostolic Regulations of our predecessors and in other statutes, however worthy of particular men tion and derogation. Given in Rome, at St. Peter, on June 18, 1968, the fifth year of our Pontificate. Notes on the Apostolic Constitution “Pontificalis Romani” 1. II Vat. Council, Const. “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” n. 25, A.A.S. 56, p. 10. 2- -ibid- n. 76, p. 119. 3. II Vat. Council, Dogmatic Const. “Lumen Gentium” n. 26, A.A.S. 57. 1965, p. 33-34. 4. II Vat. Council, Const. “Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 21 A.A.S. 19-64, p. 106. 5. II Vat. Council. Dogmatic Const. “De Ecclesia, Lumen Gentium” n. 21, A.A.S. 57, 1965, p. 25. 6. -ibid- n 28, A.A.S. 57, 1965, d. 34. 7. II Vat. Council, Decree De Presbyterorum vita et ministerio, “Presbyterorum Ordinis” n. 1, A.A.S. 58, 1966, p. 991. 8. II Vat. Council, “Lumen Gentium,” n. 29, A.A.S. 57, 1965, p. 36. 9. A.A.S. 40, 1948, p. 6. 10. II Vat. Council, Constitution de sacra Liturgia “Sacrosanctum Con cilium” n. 25. A.A.S. 56, 1964, p. 107. ‘MOTU PROPRIO” ON PONTIFICAL INSIGNIA The following Apostolic Letter on the use of pontifical in signia was issued by the Holy Father on June 21st. Pontifical insignia were instituted and accepted by the Church in the course of the centuries, so that the sacred dignity of bishops might be more clearly manifested to the faithful. This was especially so when their presentation was made in solemn manner and included in the very rite of Ordination or Consecration, together with formulae which expressed the pastoral duties of the new bishop in relation to the flock committed to his charge. There have been writers, especially in the Middle Ages, who wrote treatises on these insignia showing their pastoral and spiritual signifi cance. These insignia show forth the dignity and power of the bishop as the pastor and teacher of his flock whom he must guide and nourish since he “is to be considered as the high priest of his flock from whom the life in Christ of his faithful is in some way derived and upon whom it in some way depends”. (Vatican Council II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctorum Concilium,,,n.41: A.A.S. 56 (1964) p. 109) Gradually, however, the pontifical insignia which had remained the prerogative of bishops for several centuries, were granted as a token of dignity or honour to other ecclesiastics who assisted the bishops in the exercise of their ministry; to those prelates who, like abbots in their own monasteries or territories, enjoyed a certain jurisdiction withdrawn from the local bishops; and also to many other clerics, either individually or as members of the college. Thus at the present time there are many clerics who, although lack ing the dignity of the episcopate, nevertheless possess the privilege of 658 using pontifical insignia for a variety of reasons and in a greater or lesser degree. This has been provided for in the Code of Canon Law, or in the Apostolic Letter, “motu proprio”, “Inter multiplices”, of our Predecessor St. Pius X, Feb. 21st, 1905, or in the Apostolic Constitution “Ad incrementum” of Our Predecessor of happy memory, Pius XI, August 15th, 1934. The recent Second Vatican Council has thrown a new light on the dignity and offices of bishops in the Church and has shown more clearly the distinction between them and the priests of the second order. More over, that same Council, when treating of liturgical celebrations, had laid down “that the rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity. . . they should be within the people’s power of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation”, (ibid., n. 34:A.A.S. 56 (1964) p. 109). The elements used in sacred celebrations are signs portraying divine and invisible things (cf. ibid., n. 33:A.A.S. 56 (1964) p. 108), and they should therefore, be easily and, as far as possible, immediately understood by~ * thc faithful, so that they may be led to a knowledge of heavenly realities. Consequently, among the norms governing the reform of the sacred Liturgy there is found one which states that “it is fitting that the use of pontificals be reserved to those ecclesiastical persons who have episcopal rank or some particular jurisdiction”, (ibid., n. 130:A.A.S. 56 (1964) P. 133). In view of the mentality and conditions of the present age which at taches the highest importance to the true meaning of signs, and bearing in mind the need that liturgical rites should be characterized by a noble simplicity, it is necessary that true symbolic meaning should be restored to the use of pontifical insignia so as to set forth the dignity and office of the pastoral care of the people of God. To put into effect the will of the Council, We therefore by Our Apostolic Authority, “motu proprio” and with full knowledge, decree the following: I. According to the provisions of the article 130 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, We order that, besides bishops, only the following 659 prelates, endowed with real jurisdiction though lacking episcopal dignity, may henceforth use pontifical insignia: a) Legates of the Roman Pontiff, b) Abbots and Prelates possessing jurisdiction over a territory not subject to any diocese (cfr. CIC can. 319 § 1, can. 325); c) Apostolic Administrators permanently constituted (can. 315 §1); d) Regular Abbots “de regimine”, after they have received the blessing (can. 625) II. Pontifical insignia, with the exception of the chair and the crosier, may be used by the following though they do not have episcopal rank: a) Temporary Apostolic Administrators (can. 351 §2, 2; cfr. also can. 308) b) Vicars Apostolic and Prefects Apostolic (can. 308) III. The Prelates mentioned in nn. 1 and 2, enjoy the aforesaid rights only within their own territory and during their tenure of office. How ever, Abbots Primate and Abbots General of Monastic Congregations can use pontifical insignia during their tenure of office in all monasteries of their Order or of their Congregation. Other regular Abbots “de regi mine” possess the same right in any monastery of their order, but only with the consent of the Abbot or conventual Prior of the monastery. IV. Regular Abbots “de regimine" who have received the abbatial blessing, when they have ceased from office, and likewise titular Abbots, may use pontifical insignia in any monastery of their Order or Congrega tion, but only with the consent of the Abbot or conventual Prior of the monastery. V. Other Prelates, lacking episcopal rank, who were nominated prior to this Apostolic Letter, continue to enjoy the privileges granted to them by whatever title whether personally or as members of a college in regard to the pontifical insignia which they now possess. They may, however, of their own free will surrender these privileges in accordance with law. 660 VI. In conformity with what was recently decided by the Sacred Ecumenical Council and with the principles stated by Us concerning the observance of the true meaning of signs in sacred celebrations, Prelates who will be appointed in future, except those mentioned in nn. 1 and 2, will no longer have the right to use pontifical insignia. VII. What is stated here regarding prelates applies also to clerics who, by whatever title, use pontifical insignia. VIII. The provisions of the Apostolic Letter will come into force on September 8th of the present year. We order that all things decreed bv Us in this letter, “motu pro prio”, shall be firm and ratified, notwithstanding anything to the con trary, even though worthy of most special mention. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, June 21st, 1968, the sixth year of Our Pontificate. (Reference: L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO, July 4, 1968) A MISUNDERSTANDING OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM • L. Cullum, S.J. Loyola Housr; of Studies When the Vatican Council issued its Declaration on Religious Free dom, perhaps it was inevitable that the meaning of the Declaration would be misunderstood. And this in spite of the very clear description given by the Council itself at the beginning of the document: “This (religious) freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups or of any human power, in such wise that in matters religious no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs. Nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.” Religious freedom, therefore, concerns coercion with regard to acts. It is not directly about beliefs because the principle that these are im mune from external constraint has never been a subject of dispute in the Catholic Church. In this regard the Council says: “The doctrine of the Church that no one is to be coerced into faith has always stood firm.” (12) Therefore it should be clear what the Vatican Council meant bv religious freedom. Nevertheless the term has been misunderstood, and one misunderstanding has arisen within the Church itself, among Catho lies, some of whom apparently think that they are free to accept or reject the Church's teaching and guidance. The Council anticipated this danger and gave certain principles to meet it. First of all the Declaration states that men are not free to reject the dictates of conscience. Secondly they are not interiorly free 662 to refuse to seek religious truth or to reject it when found. And finally they are not free, when it is recognized, to live in a manner at variance with it. (1) Now, in the case of Catholics the quest is already completed, in the sense that they have found religious truth in the Catholic Church. They do not know everything, but they know where to turn. The Council does not hesitate to say that it is here, in the Catholic Church, that the truth resides: “We believe that this one true religion (Christ’s) subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men.” (1) There fore Catholics are no longer simply seekers, and upon them devolves the duty of filling out their knowledge from the treasury of the Church, and of forming their lives on her teaching and guidance. Someone may object that there is a contradiction here. Are not Catholics like all men bound to follow their conscience? How then can they be bound to follow the Church? There is no conflict. Cons cience is and must remain the final judge but this conscience is formed in the light of the Church’s teaching. It is a matter of conscience for Catholics to follow the Church’s authoritative guidance. A Catholic conscience which proceeds in disregard of the Church is a conscience at variance with itself. We may take an example precisely from the question of religious freedom. Many will not see the intrinsic force of the argumentation in the Declaration. Their tradition and education make the reasoning incon clusive to them. Therefore from sheer internal evidence — if that were all they need regard — they would have no obligation to grant religious freedom to others. Would they then be free to withhold religious freedom, because they have no mandate of “conscience” to grant it? As Catholics their conscience has a source other than intrinsic evidence to draw upon — namely, the teaching of the Church, which Catholics are bound to follow. Vatican II in another place says this most clearly: “In the form ation of their consciences, the Christian faithful ought carefully to attend to the sacred and certain doctrine of the Church. The Church is, by the will of Christ, the teacher of the truth. It is her duty to give ut 663 terance to, and authoritatively to teach, that Truth which is Christ Himself, and also to declare and confirm by her authority those prin ciples of the moral order, which have their origin in human nature itself.” (14) The last sentence touches our example very nearly because reli gious freedom is a conclusion from natural reasoning. Some have questioned the Church’s competence in declaring principles of natural reason, but the Council is very clear in affirming it: “It is her duty. .. to declare and confirm by her authority those principles of the moral order which have their origin in nature itself.” (14) It is true — and the Council is very clear on this point — that the measure of assent to various statements will vary with the intention of the teaching authority. This is not for reasons of religious freedom but because the Magisterium commits itself in different degrees in dif ferent utterances. It would seem clear that the Council’s commitment to the basic notion of religious freedom as immunity from coercion, is much more categorical than its commitment, for example, to the proposition that “the demand for freedom in human society . . . regards in the first place the free exercise of religion.” This is a hope rather than an af firmation of what is; most people of the world could not care less. There fore the Council gives warning that the statements of the Pope (and this principle is valid for the Magisterium in general) are to be adhered to “according to his manifest mind and will.” (Lumen Gentium 25) Hence those Catholics who think they find support in the Dec laration on Religious Freedom for an attitude of independence with re gard to the Church’s authoritative teaching and directives are finding something that is not there. The Church authorities are entirely within the spirit of the Declaration when they continue to issue doctrine and directives, when they commission ministers to communicate these in their name, and finally when they exact from the faithful conformity with them. Actually to maintain anything else is to assert the absurdity that the Church has been denatured by the Declaration on Religious Freedom. She is by her very character qualified to state what is true and good, and to require belief and compliance. Where she speaks as teacher and 664 guide she does not make final appeal to the intrinsic persuasiveness of the propositions she is communicating. She is not a religious tindera exposing her wares to the passerby in the hope that what she offers may strike his fancy. She does not have to be a good debater to gain adher ence to her teachings; her children are to accept her guidance. “In matters of faith and morals the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with re ligious assent of soul.” {Lumen Gentium 25) While the Declaration does not directly discuss the possibility of modifications in a Catholic’s relation with his Church’s authorities, nevertheless, the limitations of civil authority in matters religious hav ing been thoroughly ventilated, it is inevitable that men’s minds will turn to analogous relations: between priest and bishop, religious free dom, human dignity, is operative here also and is receiving new emphasis in all human affairs. Murray in an introduction to the Declaration says.: “Though the Declaration deals only with the minor issue of religious freedom in the technical secular sense, it does affirm a prin ciple of wider Import — that the dignity of man consists in his respon sible use of freedom. Some of the conciliar Fathers — not least those who opposed the Declaration — perceived that a certain indivisibility attaches to the notion of freedom. The word and the thing have wrought wonders in the modern world; they have also wrought havoc. The Conciliar affirmation of the principle of freedom was narrowly limited — in the text. But the text itself was flung into a pool whose shores are wide as the universal Church. The ripples will run far.” The Council has foreseen this wider freedom and in fact promoted it. To take an example from the Decree on the Appropriate Renewal of Religious Life, superiors are enjoined to govern their subjects “with regard for their human personality”, to encourage them “to ... an active and responsible obedience”, to “listen willingly” and to “encourage them to make a personal contribution to the welfare of community and Church.” This is but an application of that emphasis on human dignity which in another connection gives birth to religious freedom. Because of it superiors are to deal with their subjects — in religion, in the diocese, in the parish — more as with persons, to make their role more responsible 665 and creative. There will be a greater measure of consultation; a wider autonomy in the lower echelons. Nevertheless this enlarged role of the subject must leave authority intact. The Decree on the Appro priate Renewal of Religious Life, to take one example, says: “However the superior’s authority is not to be weakened to decide what must be done and to require the doing of it.” (14). Hence in conclusion, the Declaration on Religious Freedom has not in any measure released Catholics from their duty of submission to the Church’s authority. When the Hierarchy speaks with authority Catholics must accept what is said, and those engaged in communicat ing the Church’s message must transmit it faithfully. They do not speak in their own name. For example, the Church lately issued cer tain prescriptions about fasting. To say that these are violations of re ligious freedom is fantastic. Another example: the Pope has spoken on celibacy. Perhaps the arguments of the encyclical do not strike all with equal force. Nevertheless all must accept the wisdom of the de cision for our times. The Bishops of the United States said precisely this in their recent long doctrinal pastoral. “This the new insistence by Paul VI upon the requirement of priestly celibacy in the Western Church. . . should be seen by the clergy from being a curtailment of free dom, this is a consecration of Christian freedom.” Obedience “freely given within a community subject to an authority recognized as authentic, indeed as the instrument of God,” is an expression “of Christian free dom." PASTORAL SECTION HOMILETICS • D. Tither, C.SS.R. Eighteenth Sunday After Pentecost (Oct. 6th.) MARRIAGE: SYMBOL OF UNION OF CHRIST AND CHURCH. Our Lord was once invited to a marriage feast at a place called Cana in Galilee. He accepted the invitation. What a grfat honour this was for the newly wedded couple! On this happy day—on the day of their marriage, Our Lord was their guest. Many young men and women are at present planning their mar riage. They look forward to the day when they will stand before God’s altar and give themselves to each other in holy Matrimony. Such a young couple might well sav: “How wonderful it would be on our wed ding day if Christ were our guest. We will have many guests of course, but how much happier we would be, how much holier our marriage would be if Christ were there. We would like Christ to be at our mar riage just as He was at Cana.” But if that Catholic couple are married before the priest, then Christ will be there. Christ will be there because He has made marriage some thing holy. He has made marriage a sacrament, and Christ is present in every sacrament. Dear brethren, if you stood before God’s priest and exchanged your marriage vows, then you received the sacrament of marriage. Christ came to you on that day with a special grace. He knew the love in your hearts for one another. He heard you pronounce your 667 marriage vows. He saw you pledge yourselves to each other until death. He was there and He blessed your marriage. And when you walked away from God’s altar to begin your new life together, you did not go alone. Christ went with you. Through the sacrament of marriage He would be your companion in the years of married life. Through the sacrament of marriage He would give you His special graces or special helps to live a holy married life. He would help you to deepen your love for one another. He would help you sacrifice yourselves for your children and for one another during the years ahead. Dear brethren, how grateful we should be that God has made marriage a sacrament. How grateful we should be that Christ is pre sent at a Catholic marriage. How grateful we should be that He offers His special graces to married couples. I say this because marriage is not easy. One would gain the impression from many modern mo vies and becks that marriage is a kind of a dream, that it is easy for a man and woman to live together and love one another. But ask anyone who has lived a successful married life and they will tell you that marriage is not so easy. They will tell you that love is not just a dream but that it is something that requires effort and self-sacrifice. For example, as time goes by the man will begin to realise that his wife is human and has her faults. Perhaps he did not notice these faults before and now he must practice more patience and gentleness. And the wife will discover that her husband is not as perfect as she thought—he too has his faults and these are not al ways easy to bear. So, very earlv in marriage, mutual tolerance and patience are called for. And if this is lacking, discord and unhappi ness can so easily enter and threaten the marriage. Nor is it always easy to accept the children that God might send: to work month after month and year after year for the welfare of one’s partner and children. And certainly it is not easy to live a holy married life in the modern world—a world that challenges the very sanctity of marriage; a world that identifies love with lust and selfishness; a world that praises sin ful methods of birth control and has no complaint against adultery. 668 Yes certainly there will be difficulties. Marriage demands courage and virtue. But Christ will always be there through the sacrament of Matrimony. He will always give the graces needed to bear these dif ficulties, to love one another and one’s children with true love. Catholic married couples are challenged on the day of their mar riage to love one another as Christ loves His Chrurch. Just as Christ gave Himself in true love to His Church, they must give themselves to one another. In order to do this Christ guarantees His help through the Sacrament of Matrimony. This help will be given if the married couple ask for it in prayer. Hence many have the beautiful practice of praying together, even of praying together each day with their children. Many too have the beau tiful practice of celebrating their anniversary of marriage by attending Holy Mass. Never forget that Christ is present at marriage; that He offers His special help iji every difficulty of married life and He will certainly grant this help if husband and wife ask for it in prayer. Nineteenth Sunday After Pentecost (Oct. 13th.) PRAYER—KEEPING CONTACT WITH CHRIST. The Holy Church tells us that the official worship we give to God when we pray together in church is the best of all prayers. We call such prayer ‘liturgical prayer.’ This is the case especially when we gather around the altar to offer the Holy Mass together. Thus the second Vatican Council said this: “Every liturgical celebration, be cause it is an action of Christ and of His Body the Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others. However, we can’t always be in church and so it is necessary to pray sometimes by ourselves. Again the Vatican Council tells us that liturgical prayers should not be the only ones we say. We should also say private prayers and not forget what St. Paul said: “Pray without 669 ceasing.” (Thess. 5:17. Const. Liturgy no. 12). And of course we should remember the command of Our Lord Himself: “You ought always to pray and not to lose heart.” (Luke 18:1) If we don’t think of God and talk to Him in prayer, then the danger is that we will forget him. If we don’t recall the fact that God watches us and loves us every moment of the day, then we may easik neglect Him. We may easily become like the rich man in the gospel. He became so interested in things that pleased him that he forgot God. He forgot to pray and God called him a fool. Through the Sacrament of Baptism we have been united to Christ in a wonderful way. We became His brothers and sisters, sons and daughters of God Our Father. When teaching us to pray Our Lord told us to say: “Our Fa ther.” And this shows us one very important aspect of prayer: it is speaking to God Our Father. Yes, in our prayer we simply speak to God; and in our private prayers we can speak to God in any words and in any language we like. But if we don’t speak to our friends there is also something wrong and we may lose their friendship. So too, we must often speak in prayer to God Our Father: we must often speak to God Who is our special Friend. What are we supposed to do when we pray? How are we going to speak to God? We should simply be like a child speaking to his fa ther. A child thinks his father is the best man in the world and he praises him. When his father gives him something he thanks him. When he has done something wrong he tells his father he is sorry. And when he wants something he goes to his father and asks him for it con fidently. So too, when we pray, when we speak to God we should praise Him, thank Him for all the things He has given us, tell Him we are sorry for our sins and ask Him for all the things we need for our bodies and souls. We don’t have to use fixed fonnulas, we can just use our own words and speak from our hearts. If we do use formulas or written prayers, we should make sure we understand them. 670 Also the Church’s liturgy will give us helpful ideas about outprayer. It will suggest things to talk to God about. For example, a man who remembers his baptism will be prompted to thank God for it and to ask God for the grace to live like a good child of God. A man who has been to Communion at Mass in the morning, when he remembers it during the day, will praise God for His goodness and speak loving words to Him. A woman who offered herself to God at Mass in the morning will be prompted to renew that offering during the day when she feels tired or disappointed. The best prayers we offer to God are liturgical prayers—those prayers we pray together in church, especially the Holy Mass. But we should also pray outside the church. We should remember God at different times during the day at home, at work, when we are travel ing. At these times we can and should speak to Him in private prayer. Let us be faithful to the Church’s strong recommendation that we offer private prayers to God every day. Twentieth Sunday After Pentecost (Oct. 20th) Asking His Help Gcd is our Father and we are His children. However, even though we are children of God we arc weak children. We are like a little child in a family. He is completely dependent on his parents for the things he needs. We need God’s help, and God wants us to ask for that help in prayer. It is natural for us to ask God for favours and assistance. In so many things that we do we realize that our own powers are limited. We soon come to a point where our own efforts fail and success de pends on circumstances over which we have no control. Then it is that we feel the need to pray. A farmer knows that he may till his soil and sow his seed, but he can’t make the sun shine or the rain fall when it is needed. A mother whose child is very sick knows that the doctor will give all the medicines he can. But he can’t make them cure the child. So she goes on her knees and prays. 671 We want to do good, to keep God’s law, but like St. Paul we feel weak, we feel an inclination to be lazy, to be unkind, to be dis honest. And if we are going to succeed in conquering these inclinations to sin, we must seek the help of God. Then there is Satan—the devil who hates us and wants us to be come God’s enemies. He tempts us to sin and so often his temptations are difficult to overcome. It is never easy to say “no” to the temp tations of the devil. He is clever. He is cunning. He is a powerful enemy. St. Peter warns us that our “adversary the devil as a roaring lion goes about seeking someone to devour.” (1 Pet. 5.8.). He also warns us that we must resist him. But we can’t resist him alone— we need God’s help. We need God’s help before we can perform any supernatural act. That is without God’s help we cannot love God. We cannot overcome temptation, we cannot even repent the sins we have committed. “With out Me,” said Our Lord, “you can do nothing.” (Jn. 15.5). Therefore we must ask for God’s help in prayer. And God wants us to ask. God wants us to be like Christ His Son. When He needed help, Our Lord went on His knees and prayed. For example, before He began His long and weary missionary journeys He prayed for forty days. At the Last Supper He prayed. From the supper room He entered the Garden of Gethsemane and prayed. He prayed for the strength He would need in the terrible hours of His Passion which was now beginning. When he hung on the Cross in agony He prayed. We need God’s help every day, and we should try to pray every day. And when we do pray, let us pray with confidence. God is cur loving Father, and like any father He wants to give good things to His children. “Ask and you shall receive,” He says, “seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened to you.” (Mt. 7.7.). Above all we should pray with confidence because when we pray, we do not pray alone. Our Lord has done much more than merely tell us to pray. He has done much more than give us an example of prayer by praying Himself. Through the grace of our baptism He is actually in us and with us. When we pray, He prays with us. Every 672 prayer of ours is also a prayer of Christ. When we pray it is not just our weak voice that our Heavenly Father hears. He hears the voice of Christ His Divine Son who prays with us and for us. Such a prayer is surely powerful. Such a prayer will surely be heard. “If you abide in Me,” said Christ, “you shall ask whatever you will and it shall be done to you.” (Jn. 15.5). We should pray every day, and we should pray with confidence. We should pray like Matthew Talbot. He was once a terrible drun kard, a slave to drink. But when he prayed he overcame this terrible vice and lived a holy life. “For the first time in my life I really prayed,’ he said, “and God came to my assistance. Twenty First Sunday after Pentecost (Oct. 27th) CHRIST THE KING During the Spanish Civil War a group of soldiers and Nationalist civilians took refuge in a fortress called the Alcazar. They were com manded by a certain Colonel Moscado. However, the Communists seiz ed the Colonel’s 17 year old son. They told Moscado that unless he surrendered the fert his son would be shot. They let the boy speak to his father on the telephone. Moscado knew that he could not sur render. He knew that he must hold the fortress at all costs. Nor could he hand over his group to certain death at the hands of the Com munists. And so he said to his son on the phone: “My dear son, I order you to die like a hero calling out: ‘Long live Spain! Long live Christ the King!’ ” To-day we celebrate the feast of Christ the King. To-day we proudly salute Christ and say: “Long live Christ our King.” And to-day we rejoice because Christ our King lives and reigns with us in the Church. Jesus Christ is indeed a King. “All authority has been given Me in heaven and on earth,” He said. (Mt. 28:18) And to-day’s gospel 673 repeats His stirring words to Pilate: “Yes, I am a King. For this I was born, for this I came into the world.” (Jn. 18:37) Yes He came to reign. He reigns now in the hearts of His mil lions of followers throughout the world. Other kings are perhaps re membered, especially if they were good and kind; if they were close to their subjects. But Christ our King is the Kindest and Most loving of all Kings, because he died on the Cross and rose again for each one cf His subjects. “Greater love than this no man has,” says St. John, “than that he should lay down his life for his friend.” (15:13) And certainly no king was ever closer to his subjects than Christ, because the King has given us His grace or a share of his Divine life through the Sacrament of Baptism. He strengthens that life in out souls in every sacrament—especially in the Holy Eucharist. In this greatest of all the sacraments His Sacred Flesh becomes our food and His Blood becomes our drink. To-day in the Holy Church our King really lives and reigns. To day He speaks to us through the Holy Father the Pope, through our bishop. “He who hears you hears Me,” said our Lord. (Lk. 10:16) Through the Pope and the bishops He commands us. He speaks to us also every time we go to Holy Mass. Because then we listen to the Epistle, Gospel and the sermon—and these are really God’s words Christ lives in the Sacraments. In every Sacrament He is truly present. When the priest baptizes, it is really Christ who baptizes. When your bishop confirms it is really Christ who-confinns. When the priest raises his hand and absolves you from sin it is really Christ who says: “I absolve you from your sins.” And through the Sacraments of the Holy Church He reigns. In former times many earthly kings led their subjects out to war and death. Christ our King has also declared war—a war against Satan and sin. He has conquered Satan by His death and resurrection. Now He gives His strength to us His subjects, so that we too may conquer Satan and sin. He gives this strength to us through the Sacraments. In Baptism He rescues us from Satan’s bondage and makes us children 674 of God. In Confirmation He gives us strength to live as mature Christ ians: strength to be loyal to Him when it would be so much easier to follow the devil; in the Holy Eucharist He gives us His Body and Blood as Food: in Confession He heals the wounds of our sins; in the Sacrament of the Sick He gives us consolation and encouragement; through Holy Orders He gives us young men who will be His am bassadors and lead us to Himself. And in Holy Matrimony He fills men and women with supernatural love and gives new members to His Kingdom. Christ our King lives and reigns in the Church. His presence amongst us should fill us with confidence. As long as we stay close to Him we too shall conquer Satan and sin. Through the sacraments es pecially we will be strengthened by Christ our King. St. Paul says: “Christ died for all in order that they who are alive no longer live for themselves but for Him who died for them and rose again.” (2 Cor. 5:15) Today as we salute Our King on His feast day, let us renew our determination fo live for Him alone. And let us remember that He will help us to do this, especially through the Sacraments. Resolve to receive them frequently. DE COLORES YOU AND YOUR TEAM REUNION (continued) • Guillermo Tejon, O.P. 3. —Common Defects in Team Reunions. There are a number of defects frequently found in Team Reunions. They account for the fact that many team reunions fail to produce the desired results. Let us mention some cf the most common defects. a) Delay in the Formation of Team;.— This happens ouitc often. Ycu meet a new cursillista. He made the Curcillo a month ago; and he is telling everybedv about it. As a matter of fact, the Cursillo seems to be the cnlv topic of his conversation. After you have listened to everything he has to say about how wonderful the Cursillo is, ycu ask him: How is vour Team Reunion?. . . How do you find it?. . . And you notice an expression of surprise on his face. . . — Team Reunion? . . Not yet! I do not attend Team Reunions yet!.. . — When are you going to start? — Later!. .. Right now I am attending as many openings, mahanitas and clausuras as I can!. . Later! Do you think that you will do it later?. . . 676 Are you not perhaps — as your Guide Book says in the introduc tion to the meditation— among those who join the poet in saying to the Lord: “Tomorrow we shall begin”, so that tomorrow we may say the same thing over again?. . . I am sure that when you say “later” you really mean it. It is not an excuse... But, frankly, I am afraid that it might be a dream. . If, when you come out of the Cursillo House with your head full of ideas and your heart full of fire. . ., you do not find the time, the strength or the conviction to do it..., do you think that you will be able to do it later? The Guide--Book insists: If you really want to. . . now is the time!. . . Strike while the iron is hot!. . . Once it becomes cold, it will be less manageable. And it might get so hard that it will not bend any more! . . . The first thing that a cursillista should do after his Cursillo is to join a team. In fact, if possible, it is better to do it while still in side the Cursillo House. b) Small and Large Teams.— When a team is too big there are no personal friendships and contacts among its members. The reunion be comes a sophisticated meeting, a crowd; and it is not lived by all the members. Of course, cursillistas should avoid falling into the opposite defect of forming too small a team. Strictly speaking, a two-man team can be organized; but it is not practical to do so. If one member is missing, the reunion will be automatically cancelled. The ideal number—as approved by the Third Spanish National Convivencia of Cursillo Leaders (September 1967)—is from four to six. 677 Of the husband-wife team reunion we shall speak later. c) Routine. — We already agreed that we cannot afford to allow the Team Reunion to develop into Routinism. It will become boring; and soon the members of the team will start abandoning it. To go through your practices of Piety with a hurried list of “ful filled” and “unfulfilled”; to dismiss your Study and your Action by repeating the same generalities week after week... is not to hold a team reunion. . .; unless you speak of Mr. Machine’s Team Reunion!. .. In a team reunion there must be life, there must be action. . . Things have to happen!... d) Purely Natural Friendship. — Friendship among the members of a team is necessary. But — as I have already explained—such friend ship should be not only natural, but supernatural as well. The human friendship that binds the members of the team has to be supematuralized. . .the setting up of the militant team, with its periodical reunions becomes a happy realization of true Christian friendship, organized and advanced to the spiritual order. (Leaders’ Manual, 267) Remove the supernatural element from your friendship; and before long you will have a club meeting instead of a team reunion. . . e) Social Affair. — This is what usually happens when the team re union is based on a purely natural friendship. The Team Reunion is a well-defined Cursillo activity. It should not be part of or mixed with anything else. It is not a social affair. . . It is not a party. . . Start serving drinks and food during your team reunion. . .; and two or three weeks later you will have to find another name to describe Can’t the drinks and the food wait until the Reunion is over?... 678 f) Discussions. — The Team Reunion is not the time nor the occa sion to indulge in debates on religion or any other subject, no matter how interesting they might be. Only things that have a direct bearing on the Piety, Study and Action of the group should be discussed in the Reunion. If there is anything else to discuss, let it wait until the Reunion is finished. If everybody is allowed to talk freely about anything, the Reunion will be extended beyond due limits. And those members who are not interested in the discussion, or who do not have the time to participate in it, will stop coming. . g) Unfaithfulness to the Schedule.— Not to start the Team Reunion on time or to unduly prolong it is the best way to cut short the life of a team. Its members will soon start getting disappointed..., and disappearing... The team will disintegrate...; and the reunion will die. . . h) Wrong Choice of Team. — Freedom of selection is important. A cursillista should be free to choose his team. Members of the same Cursillo, profession or parish; persons who were friends before going to the Cursillo; people with the same hobbies, etc. . . usually make up good teams. Let us remember that the team reunion is a gathering of friends. . . To force somebody into a team where he does not fit is to make him and the other members of the team feel uneasy . . Their reunion will lose the naturalness and sincerity that it must possess at all times. And it will not give the members of the team an opportunity to live the Christian friendship that is the team reunion.. . . However, it is advisable to have in each team a veteran of the Cursillo. He is there, not to control the team, but to help it with his spiritual life and experience. On occasions, and in order to help new or lukewarm cursillistas start, vivify their reunions, or carry out specific apostolic activities, a cursillista may be called upon to meet with a team, not of his choice; or to hold reunions with two or more teams. If they ever invite you to do this, and you can comply, please do 679 sc; even if, fcr lack of human friendship, difference in education or social status or for any other reason, you do not feel at home in that team. Your brothers need you; and your sacrifice will be an excellent kind cf apcstolate for them and for the Cursillo. By the way, when this happens, make sure that you do not aban don your own team. It is there —in your own team reunion— where ycu will find the spirit of dedication that you need to work with the other teams. Briefly, as a general rule, a cursillista should meet with whom he wishes; and, on special occasions—when his help is needed—, with whom he should. The “should” here takes fcr granted that he is ready to sacrifice fcr the Icve cf Gcd and the good cf others . . i) Lack of Durability.— Great care should be taken in the formation of a team. But, once it is fonned, the team is expected to last. Only when serious reasons advise it, should the members cf a team separate. Fcr instance, when the team has grown so big that it becomes necessary to divide it; when a member—after trying hard!— finds out that he is definitely out of place in that team, etc. And whenever there is a change, the change should be for the better, that is, fcr the goed of the team in general and of its members in particular. Seme cursillistas hold team reunions everv week. Thev do it with the first brother cursillistas thev meet at the Ultreva. But the1' do not have a team. . . That is better than net having team 'reunions at all. But this is not what the Cursillo wants. A team reunion is not a mere review cf the Service Sheet. A Team Reunion is a group of friends who live their Christianity together, who make Christianity together, who share their Christianity. . ., their knowl edge of Christ, their apostolic dreams, their conquests!. . . And for this thev have to meet regularly. Their reunion has to de durable. . . On the human, natural level, do people change friends every week? Friendships, supernatural as well as natural, are supposed to last!... 680 j) Control of a Team. — At times it happens that a team reunion is controlled by one cf the members of the team. On account perhaps of his seniority in the Cursillo, his social status ci the fact that he is a rollista or a rector; or, as a result of a mis guided zeal; or simply because cf his pride and his desire to “shine”, he takes it upon himself to preside over the Reunion, to call the shots, correct mistakes, tell his team-members what apostolic activities to choose, etc.... Make sure that this never happens in vour Team Reunion. The purpose of the Reunion is not to preach to anybody, or to correct any body or to check on anybody... It is not the occasion for anvbody to extol himself or to find fault with others. . . The Team Reunion is a gathering of friends who work together —as equals! — for a common goal. A cursillista is expected to influence and help the other members of the team with his example, prayers, friendly advice, with his spirit of Idealism, Surrender, Charity. . .; not by bossing them, not by im posing his will on them. . . If, for practical reasons, your Reunion is led by one of the mem bers of the team, please see to it that all of them are given the chance to do so; and that this practice does not lead to the control of the team or of the reunion by anybody.. . (to be concluded) AMD •QUERIES^ TRANSPLANTATIONS OF ORGANS QUESTION: What is the moral issue involved when the organ of one person is removed and grafted into another body? Sur geons have been quite successful and are getting more so now adays in these grafts. Transplants are extended to important or gans like the eye, kidney and lately the heart itself. Dr. Barnard says that the “recipient’s body is less prone to reject a heart-trans plant than a kidney ’ (Time, January 8, 1968, p. 46). We should be glad modern Medicine has made possible these kinds of transplants. To learn how to improve our human condition through reasonable medical procedures is in harmony with the moral order. Manx limes, however, these medical procedures involve exceed mgli complex moral problems. Christian doctrine establishes, and the light of reason makes it clear, that doctors, as private persons, cannot make any medical intervention without the consent (explicit, implicit or tacit) of the patient involved. Patients, on the other hand, cannot confer more rights to then doctors than those thev possess. We have no right to freely dispose or mutilate the organs of our bodv as we please. We possess only the right to use the faculties and powers of our nature in conformity with our natural finality. (AAS. 195’. p. 788: II-1I. 65. 1; I. 74) Direct mutilation of an organ or a function is permitted for the good of the person. It is also commonly agreed upon among theolo gians that one can reasonably dispose of the organs of a deceased per son for the benefit of others. We even think that every person should lx- willing to grant his physician or others the right to use the organs cf his body (after death) in loving charity for his neighbor. The fa mily or responsible relatives should lx- similarly disposed. 682 The problem is more complicated when transplants are to be ef fected from one living person to another. Some theologians have ijised the objection that any transplantation of organs from a living person to another involves an infringement of the right order. But we are of the opinion that transplantation in principle is not wrong pro vided certain conditions are verified: first, these transplants must be medically possible; second, the persons concerned must be informed of the risks involved and freely consent to the entire procedure; thirdly, all safeguards must be employed to protect both patients from injury, fourthly, the good effects which are expected must surpass the risks and inconveniences involved. If priests, doctors, nurses, policemen, astronauts etc. are morally jus tified to risk their lives in certain situations for the sake of virtue, public duty, science and culture, why should it be wrong to inconvenience oneself, to sacrifice one eye or kidney—when medically possible for the love of the neighbor? In these medical procedures the organs are not destroyed, but lovingly transferred to one’s neighbor as livingL organs. In a heart-transplant we still ought to consider another moral ques tion: when can the donor’s death be determined clearly enough to in dicate that his heart can be taken? In the past we used to think of death as a cessation of respira tion and of heartbeat. Nowadays, because of the advances made in cardiopulmonary physiology, we speak of “cerebral death”, that is, death of the brain cells after approximately four minutes of absolute lack of oxygen. This definition must be maintained since we have the ability today of preserving oxygination of the brain by artificial means which involves artificial respiration and external cardiac compression. In a heart-transplant physicians should be equally concerned with the life of both persons involved. Rather than directly hasten the do nor’s death by removing his heart to save another, they should try to prevent it by artificial means. However, once the person is dead, it would be morally correct and highly praised to prevent the destruction of the heart of the deceased person and to transfer it into a needy neighbor. Again there must be medical assurance of success. • Fr. Magin Borrajo, O.P. 683 HEAD BOW DURING HOLY COMMUNION I noticed that some people make a movement of the head — sometimes a deep head bow, sometimes a simple nod — just be fore receiving holy communion. Is this another new rite to be observed by communicants? The “head movement” in question is meant to be a sign of re verence to and adoration of the Holy Bread which the communicant in standing position is about to receive. Even after the Philippine bis hops decided on kneeling as the uniformed posture of our faithful in receiving holy communion (Vid. Decisions of the Philippine Hierarchy in Liturgical Matters, July 4-5 1967, n. 4, in BOLETIN ECLESIAS TICO, Oct. 1967, p. 726), some still bow or nod the head while already on their knees. And this, either inadvertently by force of habit perhaps, or consciously with the good intention of rendering reverence and homage to the Blessed Sacrament. Whatever the reason, the action is superfluous and must be corrected. You may inform the faithful in vour church that “no other sign of .reverence towards the Blessed Sac rament is asked from the faithful, whenever they receive holy commun ion kneeling down, because this very posture (of kneeling) expresses adoration” (Instructio de Cultu Mystcrii Eucharistici, 25 May 1967, n. 34, b). • P. du Mi-sa, O.P. ON PRIESTS GOING TO THE MOVIE THEATERS “There is, I believe, a standing order of the Hierarchy, of the Philippines prohibiting priests from going to the movie theatres. I understand, however, that the prohibition applies only in regard to indecent films and/or public theatres. Will you, please, enlighten me on the following: 1. What is the main reason for banning priests from going to the movies? 2. Are priests prohibited from seeing movies shown free in public squares for information or publicity purposes? 684 3. Does the prohibition include seeing movies shown free in a private place, where the public is, however, admitted, viz., hospitals, schools, etc.? 4. Does the prohibition apply to T.V. shows? What our consultant believes is a fact. Indeed, it is more than a “standing order”; it is a law applicable throughout the Philippines by decree of the Plenary Council held in 1953 and promulgated on 15th August, 1956. Said law is still in effect, for up to the present we know of no repeal or modification introduced therein by the Holy See or the Philippine Hierarchy. The said law has, on two occasions, been the subject of authen tic interpretation, given by the Bishops’ Commission established for the purpose in keeping with the decree No. 15 of the said Plenary Council. For the convenience of our consultant, we hereby reproduce both the law and its interpretations, in their respective original texts, since they would suffice to bring light to the questions contained in the query. Decree No. 50, of the Plenary Council, reads as follows: “Circa hanc legem (1) statuimus et declaramus sequentia: 1. Sub gravi praecepto omnibus et singulis clericis, non exceptis cxtraneis in hac regione domicilium vel quasi-domicilium habentibus, prohibitur ne in publico theatre spectaculis, choeris aliisve pompis intersint absque expressa Ordinarii Loci licentia. 2. Sub hac prohibitione non comprehenditur casus peculiars, quo theatrum ceteroquin publicum ab schola aut societate quadam catholica, Ordinario loci consentiente, ad spectaculum dandum locatione tenetur. 3. Iidem vetantur in locis publicis vulgo cinema dictis, interesse spectaculis aut ludis cinematographicis; nisi haec sub directione Sacerdotis a Superioribus aprobati in aliquo casu particular! agantur, vel de cinematographicis, ut aiunt, pelliculis (films) ab Episcopo approbatis pro sacerdotibus sermo sit. 4. Suspensionem a divinis contrahunt clerici in majoribus ordinibus constituti qui post unam admonitionem graves has prohibitiones transgrediantur.” 685 The first authentic interpretation of this decree is dated 19th No vember, 1957 and was published in the “Boletin Eclesiastico” in Decem ber cf the same year. It reads thus: “12. Dubium: Do the words graves has prohibitiones of Decree 50, x 4, refer to the prohibition contained in Decree 50, 3, as well as to prohibition contained in Decree 50, 1? Responsism: Affirmative. 13. Dttbiumt Is the suspension a divinis in paragraph 4 nemini reservata? Or is it reservata Ordinaries loci? Responsum: Affirmative ad primam partem, negative ad secundam.” The second authentic interpretation, that is undated, was published in the “Boletin Ecclesiastico”, in July, 1962. It reads: “30. Dubium: Some priests have different interpretations of this Decree. To simplify my queries, may I ask: 1) Is attending classical opera performances where very decent peo ple are present included in this prohibition? 2) What about instrumental performances, like symphonies, piano and violin concertos and the like? 3) And folk dances, like ‘Bayanihan’? Answer: Affirmative. They are included si in publico theatro exhibeantur. 31. Dubsum: I know that some priests attend all kinds of movies, in public movie-houses, with no permission of the Ordinary. Can this permission be presumed, provided that the film is rated A-l or A-2. etc., and not the condemned or objectionable category? Answer: Negative. 32. Dubium: What sin is committed by a priest who volates any of the prohibitions of Decree 50? Answer: Verba in Decreto adhibita “sub gravi praecepto”, “gra ves has prohibitione”, “suspensionem a divinis contrahunt” clare osten dunt eius violationem constituere posse gravis peccati materiam. 686 33. Dubium: Can’t there be a general ruling regarding the seeing of films by priests, so that there will be no need of asking permission from the Ordinary every time they want to see a film for educational, cultural aims or even honest recreation? Answer: Recurratur ad proprium Ordinarium loci.” It must be noted that the text of the law, as well as its authentic interpretaions, makes no distinction between decent and indecent or ob jectionable presentation or films, but rather insist on the circumstance that the presentation or film be shown in a public theatre, that is to say, a hall or locale expressly devoted to these purposes and accessible to all kinds cf persons. Even in the case of a public theatre, the law sets down three ex ceptions to the prohibition: 1) The case in which, with the consent of the Ordinary of the place, a school or other Catholic organisation present a show in a pub lic theatre hired for that purpose. 2) When iq-a public movie-theatre and in a particular case a film is exhibited under the direction of a priest approved by a Superior com petent therefor. 3) When in a public movie-theatre there are shown films approved by the Bishop for priests. Following the above exposition, it is easy to briefly answer the queries poised: Ad Primum: Whatever was the reason for the prohibition imposed upon the priests, only the Fathers of the Council, who were the authors of the law, can tell us. Certainly it would not be difficult to surmise which were the reasons that prompted them to do so; but, we would rather not do it, for two reasons. First, because whatever we may say would only carry the weight of a private opinion. Secondly, because it is in no way necessary: the reason for the law is not the law itself; and, although the enquiry and knowledge of the reason or motive of the law may be an aid for its correct interpretation when the meaning of the law, as formulated, is obscure (Can. 18), in the present case the text of the conciliar decree is sufficiently clear, specially in the lig.it of the authentic interpretations. 687 Ad Secundum, Tertium, Quartum: The prohibition does not comprise the cases indicated by these queries. An exhibition in an open air public plaza or square is not a per formance given in a public theatre; neither is the domicile or dwelling of a family a public theatre nor an establishment open to the public, but not devoted to shows, as, for example, a hospital or a school, even if there be therein an auditorium for the purpose. And a television program is not shown in a public show house. It could be that, even in the proposed cases, the priests should refrain from attending either because the performance or film offends the norms of morality or because their presence may be a cause for scandal to the laymen, but such does not mean that these instances be deemed included in the particular nonns laid down by the con ciliar decree. • Fr. Bi-rnahi. Alonso, O.P. CHRISTIANIZATION OF THE PHILIPPINES THE OBLATES OF MARY IMMACULATE IN THE PHILIPPINES The story of the missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate in the Philippines is one that tells of the Lord’s loving kindness. It is a story of surprising growth and development after much sacrifice and suffering, a parallel of the phenomenal rise of the Congregation from its humble beginnings in the South of France. When in 1816 the then Rev. Father Eugene de Mazenod, 29, newly ordained, gathered around him a few priests “to preach the Gospel to the poor,” he never expected their number to grow to the 7,000—plus it is today. France * at that time was in shambles where religion was concerned. A whole generation had grown up deprived of normal contact with the Faith — with the Mass and priests and the catechism. The situation in the provinces, Father de Mazenod realized, was even worse than in the cities. Evangelists were needed once more, men who would dedicate them selves to stirring up the Faith of the poor provincials. The small group of priests was primarily a mission band. From their pauperlike house, a former monastery, where a board over two barrels served as their dining table and one lamp gave light to the rooms, the intrepid priests went out to the neighboring towns preaching missions and retreats and rekindling the Faith. A few years later, in 1826, when their existence as a community was threatened and after their number had grown to a dozen priests and two clerics, they decided to apply for approval as a religious congregation. It was hard work. They had many enemies, among them many of the wealthy and cultured of Marseilles, the large port-city in the South. These people despised their apostolate to the poor and their preaching in the native patois, Provencal-instead of in French. 68!) But after much trouble and many disappointments, the growing band was constituted as religious congregation in February 17, 1825. Pope Leo XIII himself expressed satisfaction with the Rule drawn up by Father de Mazenod. Several years later the young Founder was made Bishop of Marseil les. Then in 1841 Bishop Bourget of Montreal, Canada asked him if he could send some of his Oblates to help. Father de Mazenod was reluctant. For their own work in France they had too few men. Bishop Bourget spoke to him of the desperate and the poor in his diocese, the Indians and the French settlers. De Mazenod was touched. After con sultations with the Oblate Fathers nearby, four priests and two lay brothers were sent to Montreal to help the Bishop. This sacrifice was to mark the beginning of the congregation’s phe nomenal growth. It was also to indicate two characteristics of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate: they put themselves at the disposal of the Bishop and people to whom they are sent and adapt to the needs of the situa tion by willing to sacrifice men they feel they need for a task at hand for another, should the need be greater in that other. After Canada the Congregation sent men to Ceylon in 1847, the U.S. and Great Britain in 1849, South Africa in 1852, Germany in 1885, Spain in 1893, Australia in 1894, Belgium in 1901, Italy in 1902, Belgian Congo in 1931, IndoChina in 1934, and in 1939, THE PHILIP PINES. In the summer of 1938 the Secretary of Apostolic Delegate to the Philippines negotiated with the Oblate Superior General the acceptance of a mission in the diocese of Zamboanga. In March, 1939 an official request was made by the Holy See for the Oblates to accept two mission territcries: the civil province of Cotabato and the Sulu Archipelago. Both were under the jurisdiction of Msgr. Luis del Rosario, S.J., bishop of Zamboanga. The first group of Oblate missioners were from the Provinces of the United States: Rev. Fathers Emile Bolduc, George Dion, Egide Beaudoin, Joseph Boyd, Cuthberth Billman and Francis McSorley, headed by Rev. Father Gerard Mongeau. 690 When they arrived Cotabato numbered 80,000 Catholics, twice as many Moslems and half as many pagans. Sulu counted 25,000 Moham medans and only five thousand Catholics. Four of the seven pioneers stayed in Cotabato, three went to Sulu. Those in Cotabato travelled ceaselessly from their base in what is now Cotabato City to the towns along the coast and in the interior. This was what the three Jesuits they had replaced had done before them. The idea was to keep moving and try to pick up some of the more widely spoken dialects and hope for the day when more missionaries would come to settle the strategic points and work to bring the Lord’s people closer to Him. In Sulu the three Oblates replaced the lone Jesuit, who had been acting as parish priest of Jolo, the capital, where most of the Catholic po pulation was concentrated. One priest took over his duties, the other two gave the pastor assistance needed and hopped from island to island in service of the Catholics and in an attempt to win the goodwill of the Moslems. In the next few years, that is, till World War II broke out in Dec ember, 1941, nine other Fathers and one lay brother were received from rhe States. The increase in manpower allowed a bit more permanence to be established in the work in Cotabato. A number of parishes were erected, a few small churches and priests’ residences built. A dormitory for boys was opened, but this was not to become a lasting foundation. Ground was broken for a small high school in Midsayap, one of the larger towns. In the years to follows the Fathers would often think back to this initial effort in education. Some of the Oblates think today that perhaps they can point to no greater achievement in their efforts in the Philip pines than this first Notre Dame high school’s establishment on the eve of the global war. One other significant thing happened to the Oblates before the Japa nese invaded the Philippines. They were asked to take care of the na tional newspaper of the hierarchy of the Philippines, The Philippines Com monwealth, which was published in Manila. One Father was assigned to this job, in spite of the severe demands of the new Oblates missions in the South. 691 Then the war came. The seventeen Oblates lost all they had — Churches and rectories and the school were burned to the ground. The men were separated from each other. They fled with the people to the mountains. In June 1942 three Oblates attempted a daring escape to Australia, but they were captured and put to death in the town of Menado in the Celebes Sea. The fourteen others, enticed by Japanese promises of “Re gister and we won’t harm you” or merely rounded up at gunpoint, were packed into concentration camps in Davao by the beginning of the year 1943. The stories of these Oblates from the outbreak of the war till their reunion in Davao would fill volumes, the early Fathers like to relate. In retrospect, as Rev. Father Edward Gordon, Oblate Provincial in 1953, wrote to the General Chapter of that year, the war years “were one of the most valuable periods of the time spent in the Philippines. Today the work of the Oblate Fathers has gone so rapidly and with such obvious success that one often asks why this was so. Some of the answers can be found in the year 1942 when the Fathers lived with the people. . . shared their goods in common and even wore the clothes of their hosts. . . received extraordinary protection from the people and in a word cemented a bond that would be used when the battlefields were cleared and it came time again to establish the kingdom of Christ in Cotabato and Sulu.” Came Liberation in 1945 the fourteen Oblates were free to return to their work, but nine of them were in no condition to resume theit hectic activities, so they were sent back to the U.S. to regain their strength. The five who stayed on aligned themselves with the Annv for purposes of transportation and food and moved south with the forces of the libe ration. The privileged five were led bv the “little man of big dreams,’ Father Mongeau, and were to be granted tremendous blessings in the next few months. After helping set up burnt-down towns and coopera ting with the civil authorities in helping organized town life, the Fathers started building once more. Churches and rectories went up, and so did the first Notre Dames. It was about this time that a great change was to take place in the province of Cotabato. In 1939 there had been an effort on the 692 part of the government to entice people of the north to settle the vast areas in the Koronadal Valley. Unlike a previous attempt at settlement which was a fiasco, this effort was partially successful, but when war came the people fled to their hometowns in the north, most of them with the intention of never returning. They found, however, that the conditions in the north were worse than had ever been in Cotabato in the south. They and thousands of others came back after the war to settle in what they felt was a “land of promise.” Towns were springing up, the need for priests became more and more pressing. In 1946 and 1947 alone it is estimated that two hundred thousand settlers made Co tabato their home. The early prejudice against and fear of the Mos lems were beginning to break down, and the Moslems for their part were beginning to accept the Christian settlers and live and work with them in the towns. The Notre Dame scsool system was an “accident”. During the war the Fathers decided that it would be best to stick to parish work. One exception was to be made in reopening the school at Midsayap. The school at Midsayap could not reopen, however, due to the presence of Japanese stragglers in the area. A Notre Dame was set up in Co tabato instead. This proved to be an instant success. Enrollment went way beyond expectations. People in other towns started clamoring for schools. It was at their insistence and because the Oblate Fathers re cognized the seriousness cf their needs that the now famous N.D. chain of schools was established. The arrival of the Marist Brothers in 1948 assured the educational system of permanence and professionalism. In the years that followed Dominican Sisters, Religious of the Virgin Mary and Maryknoll nuns were to take care of the 80-plus Notre Dame school units. Through these schools, the Oblates felt, the Faith that was founded largely on custom could be given its proper solid foundation of reason. The adults were practically consigned to their old ways, the youth was the important element. Bring up a whole new generation in the Faith! — this was the plan. It did not succeed because there were not enough priests and religious to go around and because the influence of the home 693 had been badly misjudged. The schoolchildren took on the Catholic values at school but rejected them and accepted the values of their elders when they were away from school and at home. The schools alone would not do. In 1947 the first issue of the Mindanao Cross rolled off the machines of the new Notre Dame Press. It was to be a community paper with a mild sprinkling of religious news. In 1957 radio station DXMS, the first in the province, was es tablished. A few vears later a second station, DXND, which is con nected with the Notre Dame Colleges of Cotabato, was founded. There is talk in the air about a TV station but the when and the how and the where still have to settled. As the years rolled by more and more ideas for reaching the people more effectively and really being of service to them were turned into realities. A hospital run by Dominican nuns was set up, as were clinics in several towns. A housing project (properly called Notre Dame Vil lage) relocated 400 families from the slums of Cotabato. A mission band was started, a retreat house built. And in the last few years, serious efforts have been made at helping the people set up credit un ions and cooperatives, and once dry ricefields now have all the water they need because Bishop Mongeau and his priests had the foresight and generosity to buy pumps for the people, payable over a long term period whenever they enjoy good harvests. The situation in Cotabato was changing for the Oblates. Every year a fresh batch of young priests would arrive, eager to help—and was there work to be done! In 1958, seven years after Father Mongeau had been elevated to the episcopacy, the Pissionist Fathers came in and took over the whole of the southern portion of the province. A year be fore that the Bishop together with Father Dion founded the Oblates of Notre Dame, a new congregation for young women. Today they num ber over eighty and do indispensable work in the rural areas. And then also an increasing number of Filipinos were joining the Oblates and becoming priests. Filipino vocations were so plentiful that by 1967, of the 80-plus Oblates in the Philippines, 30 were native to the country. The first diocesan priests for Cotabato were ordained in December, 1967, and the Bishop’s seminary at Nuling gives promise of many fruitful vears to come vocation-wise. ■694 Meanwhile in Sulu Father Francis McSorley had been appointed Vicar Apostolic of the newly erected Vicariate of Jolo. He was con secrated Bishop in 1958. Progress in the archipelago was not as phe nomenal, but it was steady and telling. Schools and clinics were es tablished, a weekly newspaper, the Sulu Star, was started, an amphibian plane was acquired to facilitate travel, radio apparatus were set when ever an Oblate Father was stationed to ward off the “evil spirits” of loneliness and assure speedy communications. Sulu today can boast of the Medical Missionaries who take care of the physically sick in the islands and of the recently founded Car melite Convent which is a continual source of aid to the people’s Spiritual welfare. In this 98%-Moslem province conversions are few and vocations are much fewer—but the Lord has been good, and the son of a Moslem priest is today a priest of tremendous difficulties and his vocation to the Oblate priesthood is strictly best-seller material. But the aim of the Oblate Fathers in Sulu is not, for the moment, centered on conversion. Much work has to be done by way of un derstanding the culture and appreciating Mohammedanism, of really getting into the skin of the Moslems, before serious attempts at con version can be considered. Notre Dame of Jolo College has become a center for the study of Islamic culture and religion and men from ab road as well as from large universities in Manila come here for re search. In the meantime the Oblates and the other generous religious in Sulu do all they can to be of service to the people by way of schools and clinics. They look on themselves principally as witnesses to Jesus Christ and His Church. And already Moslem prejudice against Christians and outsiders is breaking down. Interestingly the Cathedral in Jolo, a truly beautiful building for prayer, was constructed with the help of the Moslems, and it is considered not just the pride of the Catholic Church but of Jolo. Besides their missions in Cotabato and Sulu the Oblates have un der their care a parish and a school in Grace Park, Caloocan City; a mission band with bases in the scholasticate at Quezon City, Bacolod City and Cotabato; and a high school in Hongkong. 695 Our Lady of Grace Parish was confided to their direction shortly after the war. They thought of the parish as a base in Manila, sort of an essential house in as much as all the goods sent from abroad and intended for the missions had to pass customs in Manila. There were only 15 parishioners then and Caloocan was largely a vast ricefield, but now the area has been divided into four parishes, so crowded has it become with people, and even then the Oblate Fathers have more than 50,000 people at our Lady of Grace. The school at Grace Park in cludes secondary and elementary grades. Oblate priests act as admi nistrators and serve also as counsellors. The mission band is an ever-on-the-go group. The seven priests preach retreats almost as often as they are invited. This keeps them out as many as 28 days a month. Four are stationed at the scholasticate, two in Bacolod, and one has charge of the retreat house and the shrine of Our Lady in Tamontaka, Cotabato. Hongkong opened her arms to the Oblates in 1966. The school there is staffed by men from this Province. How the Oblates got there is an interesting and revealing story. The Philippines Provincial, Rev. Father Joseph Milford, thought that it was time, in spite of how thinly spread out our Fathers in the missions were, that the Province had foreign missions of its own. Hongkong was considered because of the possibility of getting into Communist China, at least so the joke goes. So the Provincial approached His Excellency, Bishop Bianchi of Hongkong, “Bishop, we would like to come into your diocese.” The Bishop countered, “What would you like to do?” “We are at your disposal; what can we do for you?” answered the Provincial. Said the Bishop surprised, “This is the first time a religious said something like this to me.” That is how the Oblates got into schoolwork in Her Majesty's Crown Colony, and with this, this brief sketch of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate in the Philippines comes to a close. They have been de lighted to be cf service to the people and, thanks be to the Lord, have seen years blessed with good fortune. URCIHhhne “PROPER OF THE SAINTS” IN ILONGO APPROVED Archbishop lose Ma. Cuenco of laro received last week the Vatican's of ficial approval of the “Proper of the Saints,' volume in Ilongo of the Roman Missal. The approval by Rome was conveyed to the Jaro Archbishop by Papal Nuncio Carmine Rocco in a letter dated June 8, 1953. With the Nuncio’s letter was the sample volume of the said part of the Roman Missal, which was sent to Rome sometime ago for approval. On the first page of the said sample volume was written and stamped the approval of the Vatican's "Consilium Ad Exseauend.im Constitution de Sacra Liturgia" dated May 18. 1968. The "Proper of the Saints-' approved volume includes the feasts from lune to November. On this page could be seen the exact text of the approval by the Vati CONSILIUM AD EXSEQUENDAM CONSTITUT1ONEM DE SACRA LITURGIA Prot. n. A 178/68 INSULARUM PHILIPPINARUM instante Exc.mo Domino Rocho Carmine, Episcopo tit. Justinianopolitano in Galatia, Nuntio Apostolico, Nomine Ordinariorum regionis linguae “Ilongo” in Insulis Philippinis, litteris die 10 mail 1968 datis, facultatibus huic “Consilio” a Summo Pontifice PAU LO PP. VI tributis, interpretationem ‘Ilongo” ‘Proprii’ Sanctorum Missalis Romani a mense iunio ad mensem novembrem perlibenter probamus seu confirmamus. Contrariis quibuslibet minime obstantibus E Civitate Vaticana, die 18 maii 1968. (Benno Card. Gut) Praeses (A. Bugnini, CM) a Secretis) 697 RP CATHOLIC BISHOPS TAKE LEAD IN SOLVING SOCIO-ECONOMIC ILLS The Catholic Bishops of the Philippines last June signified their intent to have the church take the leadership in rural development when 62 Bishops from all over the islands held a three-day conference at Villa San Miguel in Mandaluyong, Rizal to examine the Philippines’ socio-economic problems and to assess the role of the Catholic hierarchy in bringing about the solution to such problems. The conference, presided over by Bishop Mariano Gaviola, secretary gene ral of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, also evaluated the effects of the Rural Development Congress last year held in response to Pre sident Marcos’ call on religious leaders to take a more active part in the social action program he initiated when he declared the period from May 1. 1968 to April 30, 1969 as “Social Action Year”. At the urging of the Catholic bishops, the conference gave the Philippine bishops an opportunity to listen to lay and government experts talk on cooperative, land reform, rice productivity and other allied topics that would bring about rural deve lopment. Among the experts at the conference were Undersecretary of Agriculture Dioscoro Umali. rice consultant Carlos J. Valdez, Land Authority Commis sioner Fernando Santiago, PNB Vice-President Nicolas Fernandez. The experts pointed out that the Catholic Church should strive to help the barrios more, to give the management of the temooralities of the Church to laymen, to exert its influence on the moneyed group in the country, and that only the Church can change the wrong attitude of people on things. On the Bishops' part, Bishop Gaviola said the Church is willing to take the lead in this move for rural development, pointing to the recent Se minar on Rural Development held at Loyola House of Studies and the Ru ral Congress recently. He added that the Church will try its b< * St to be of service to the peo ple in the barrios through an integrated program planted by the bishops. At the same time, the bishops present at the conference were unanimous in pledging assistance and cooperation in the implementation of the land re form program of the administration. After the conference, a church-state meeting was held at Malacanang Pa lace, attended by church leaders and presided over by the President. The social and economic problems of the country were again discussed at this ecumenical gathering. Earlier, Bishop Gaviola was designated by the President to head a com• nittee to implement all programs for Social Action Year. 698 JOHN XXIII ECUMENICAL CENTER AT LOYOLA HOUSE OF STUDIES, Q.C. The JOHN XXIII ECUMENICAL CENTER was officially inaugu rated this month at the Loyola House of Studies. After an introductory address by Professor Daniel Arichea, Jr., of Union Theological Seminary, a joint Bible Service was held and a homily delivered by the Most Rev. Ma riano G. Gaviola, now a member of the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity. On this occasion the following telegram was received from the Vatican: “On inauguration of John XXIII Ecumenical Centre during Second Annual Meeting of Philippine Episcopal Conference Holy Father as pledge of divine favors imparts special apostolic blessing with prayerful wishes for fruitful development and progress in ecumenical work according to conciliar directives. — Cardinal Cicognani.” Some twenty-seven members of the Catholic Hierarchy attended the inau guration; among them Archbishop M. Madriaga, Archbishop J. Sison, Arch bishop Teopisto Alberto and others. There were about thirty representative! of various Christian Communions, among them Isabelo de los Reyes, Jr. Su. preme Bishop of the Philippine Independent Church with two other PIC □ishops, Rev. David Schneider of the Lutheran Church, Rev. Paul Granadosin of the United Methodist Church, Rev. Charles Matlock of St. Andrew’: Theological Seminary, etc. Some of the benefactors of the project were also present. The JOHN XXIII ECUMENICAL CENTER (JEC), a project of the Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, was approved by the Bishops in their meeting of February 1968. It was made financially possible through the cooperation of the Bishops Conference; the Association of Major Superiors of Men, who have borne the heaviest financial burden; some individual dona tions; and the generous help of various benefactors. Rev. Fr. de la Costa, Provincial, approved the project from its very start, and Loyola House ol Studies, through Fr. Rector, Santiago Gaa, generously granted space neces sary for the center (an office and a conference room). The JEC will function largely as a national Service Center, opened to interested groups and individuals, hoping to help in the promotion of ecu menical study and research. It will try to coordinate ecumenical activities of various types, and organize encounters and dialogues with authorized re presentatives of various Christian churches. On a private basis, the JEC has started the publication of an “Ecume nical News Bulletin”, containing news of ecumenical significance from all over the world. It will concentrate in a special way however on ecumenical activities in the Philippines. 699 The Bishops’ Commission for Promoting Christian Unity is composed of the following members and assistants: Bishop Cornelius de Wit, Chairman; Archbishop Teopisto V. Alberto and Archbishop Juan C. Sison, Members; Fr. Pedro S. de Achutegui, S.J. Secretary and Fr. Vicente San Juan, S.J. Assistant Secretary. Available at the JEC and in various stages of development are the following: in addition to a very modest but select ecumenical library, there is a card-catalogue of books and periodicals of ecumenical interest in the L.H.S. library, a special collection of the most important articles on Ecu. menism and Christian churches, together with a catalogue of such articles to be found in the periodicals received by the L.H.S. library; a descriptive listing of the various Christian churches in the Philippines; and a card catalogue con taining the curriculum vitae of outstanding personalities in the Christian churces of the Philippines. A series of tapes containing complete course on Ecumenism and interesing speeches and articles of current ecumenical interest will soon be available. ROME PONTIFICAL COMMISSION “JUSTICE AND PEACE” STUDIES RIGHTS OF MAN To commemorate the 20th anniversary of the United Nation's Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man, the Study Committee on the Issues ol Peace and International Community, an organ of the Pontifical Commission ‘Justice and Peace’, met from June 12 to 15 at the Commission’s headquarters in Rome, to study the best means of helping the various national ‘Justice and Peace’ group in their promotion of the rights of man, with special reference to the racial question. The participants at the seminar, which was presided over by Mr. Vittorino Veronese, President of the Committee, discussed the link between peace anc the recognition of the rights of man, with reference to concrete situations in Viet nam, the Sudan, Nigeria, South Africa, Rhodesia, etc. They observed with regret that the technological progress of the human race did not entail a corres ponding ethical progress. With respect to the Second World Dav of Peace to be observed on Jan uary 1, 1969, the Committee decided to work for greater participation in it by all governments, organizations, and religious bodies. ROME JAPANESE ENCYCLOPEDIA ON VATICAN II BEING PUBLISHED A seven-volume encyclopedia of the Second Vatican Council, edited by Professors Henry Van Straelen, SVD, and Leo Elders. SVD. is being pub 700 lished in Japanese by the Nanzan Catholic University of Nagoya. The Bishop of Takamatsu has given the services of one of his priests for a year to help with the edition. Apart from the text of the Conciliar decrees, the encyclopedia contains commentaries by some thirty contributors, among whom are several Protestants and non-Christians. The first volume is already in the printer’s hands, and in the course ol the next year four more volumes will be printed. SWEDEN CATHOLIC POSITION ON UNITY UNCHANGED SAYS WCC LEADER Pope Paul Vi’s statement on Catholic doctrine was a “restatement of the well-known position of the Catholic Church” that “it is the Church of Jesus Christ,” the Rev. Eugene Carson Blake, general secretary of the World Council of Churches said here. Dr. Blake’s comment on Pope Paul’s proclamation of a “Credo of the People of God” was n.iyen on the eve of the WCC general assembly which opened on luly 4. Under the heading of Christian unity Pope Paul said: “Recognizing the existence outside the organism of the Church of Christ of numerous elements of truth and sanctification which belong to her as het own and tend to Catholic unity... we entertain the hope that Christians whe are not yet in full communion of the one and only Church will one day be returned in one flock with only one shepherd.” Dr. Blake commented: “I have been asked whether I interpret the Pope’s remark about one flock and one shepherd as a bid for all Christians to return to the Roman Catholic Church. “It does not say this specifically, but it is implied in the normal Roman Catholic ecclesiology which has never given up the position that it is the Church of Jesus Christ. This was modified by a number of Vatican II docu ments, but the dogmatic position has not been changed. “This is a conservative statement of the Roman Catholic faith. It does not seem to me to be other than a statement of the well-known position of the Catholic Church.” 701 “I have been asked why the Pope made this statement now,” be said. “I believe there are two possible reasons: “First, he might have wished to discourage romantic ecumenism which is to suppose that all that is required for the unity of the Church is to be more friendly and tolerant than we have been heretofore. “And second, it was not so much directed at ecumenism but at those pro gressives in the Roman Catholic Church who would go farther than was in tended by the Vatican Constitution on the Church and the World, who, from his point of view, have accepted modern secular assumptions and there fore to radically modify the traditional teachings of the Church. “It is good for us to know the breadth and depth of the theological problems of Christian unity and I would refer to anyone who is interested in this subject to die address which Father Roberto Tucci will be delivering to the WCC assembly.” Father Tucci, S.J., is the editor of La Civilta Cattolica, Rome Jesuit review. Taipei CANON OF THE MASS IN CHINESE APPROVED A new Chinese translation of the Canon of the Mass, approved by the Regional Conference of Chinese Bishops, was put into use here from June 2, the feast of Pentecost. Other parts of the Mass have been said in Chinese since March 7, 1955, but this is the first time that the entire Mass has been in Chinese. Vatican City POPE RECEIVED THANKS FOR CREDO’ Messages of thanks and solidarity have been arriving for Pope Paul VI since he delivered his Credo of die People of God at ceremonies closing the Year of Faith. L'Osscrvatore KomatiQ. Vatican City daily, reported that bishops and archbishops have sent word of their adherence from such countries as Brazil, Bul garia, Czechoslovakia, Mexico, Poland and Portugal. Cardinal Cody of Chicago sent the Pope a message full of adherence from Fiumicino airport, where he was preparing to fly black to the United States. He had been in Rome for the dedication of a residence for American Priests studying in Rome, the Cardinal Stritch House. REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE • By Victor J. Pospichii. Burns and Oates/Hcrder and Herder, London, 1957, 218 pp. This is a thought-provoking work. Following the trend of contemporary thinkers, questioning many a traditional teaching like birth control and original • in, Father Pospichii has devoted this scholarly work to a re-thinking of the traditional tenet" on divorce. It is his view that the Church possesses the divine authority to dissolve all kinds of marriage, and thus permit remarriage. When Christ said, “What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder”. He was not really promulgating a law, but simply the ideal desired by nature and God. "If one were to assume”, comments Pospichii, “that this (text) is condemnation of dissolubility in general and of all its forms, then how could one justify the dissolutions the Church permits or grants today. Pauline Privilege and Privilege of the Faith, and of non consummated • acramental marriages?" It is similar with regards to the Council of Trent. The Council’s de cree runs as follows: "If anyone shall say that the Church errs when she taught or teaches, in accordance with evangelical and apostolic doctrine, that the head of marriage cannot be dissolved because of adultery of either spouse: and that neither of them, not even the innocent one who was not the cause of the adultery, can contract another marriage while the other spouse is living: and that he who has taken another after dismissing the adulteress; and she who has married another after dismissing the adulterer, commits adultery, let him be anathema.” If one interprets in die strict sense the wording of the definition, says Pospichii, it is obvious that Trent did not define that the Church cannot disscJve marriage; what is stated is that the Church has not erred in refus ing permission for divorce, in accordance with evangelical and apostolic doc trine. The direct object of the definition was the infallibility of the Church 703 (Ecelesiam errare); indissolubility is only the indirect object of the canon. As a consequence, the indissolubility of marriage is not a dogmatic proposi tion de fide, but solely a proposition fidei proxima. Father Pospichii then cites some few theologians who share his opinion. These and many other questions raised by the author merit attention and careful study. Is indissolubility with regards to sacramental consummated marriage really a dogma of faith or not? We hope an expert comes about to examine well Pospichil’s allegations. Be it dogma or not, we have to comment, nonetheless, that all explicit teachings of the Fathers and the Popes point to indissolubility. Father Pos pichii has the disadvantage of running counter to the teachings of the Church’s ordinary magisterium. Father Pospichii propounded this thesis, moved by pity for those millions of men and women, who have been divorced or abandoned in solitary living by their marriage partners. • P. Salgado O.P. WE AGNOSTICS: On the Tightrope to Eternity. By Bernard Basset, S.J. New York: Herder and Herder, 1968. Pp. 139, $3.95. This book by Fr. Basset, S.J. is written in an autobiographical style through his main character, Harry Dawes. It touches on this post-conciliar period the ways of which are apt to upset and confuse Catholics of the type of Harry’s wife, Margery, who prefer their ‘old style—Pius XII’ religion. Harry is not to be upset by either group whether pre-or post-conciliar. He has come to the realization that reality, especially Christ’s reality in whatever trappings is the stuff of spirituality. How Harry Dawes came to this conclusion, he relates to the reader, from the vantage point of his sixty-odd years. He traces how he, at the age of 38, after suddenly becoming troubled about his existence, began to look for God in earnest. How he finally found God, accepted Christ as God, accepted Christ’s Church with the help of such diverse souls as St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, Aldous Huxley, Marcus Aurelius, William James, Paul Claudel and even Dag Hammarskjold, is told in the engaging and inimitable style associated with Fr. Basset and it all makes for fascinating • P. C. Pascual 704 SELECTED PHILIPPINE SERMONS. Christian Leaders’ Series no. 6, National Council of Churches in the Philippines, 1967. 110 pages. 1 * 2.00 • Honorio Castigador, O.P. This book which is made up of sermons contributed by local ptbminent Protestant theologians, is primarily intended “to provide a record of the place and direction of preaching among Protestants after sixty-eight years of Protest ant history in the Philippines...” Notwidistanding this purpose and the book’s understandable peculiarities, the sermons could easily serve as a handy guide and reminder to both pastor and faithful of any denomination. Out of the many, two striking examples lead us to profess such applicability. Cirilo Rigos’ critical observation of Christian life within the walls of Protestanism finds similar situations with the rest of Christianity. He says: “Thus changes are taking place in the church and outside die church. But we wonder whether there is any change in the way Christians live. And if there is a change, we are not always sure it is foe the better. On the contrary, if facts can be weighed in the balance, the setbacks of Christianity can be said to be more than its gains and the Christians whose mission is to help transform society into a community of God-loving and the God-fearing, are usually cor rupted by the decaying social order.” Benito Cabanban^ “Seminary Graduation Sermon” follows the same tenor of argument. His warnings and the following advices regarding the difficulties in the ministry are signposts which neophytes as well as oldtimers in the ministry will be grateful for having ruminated repeatedly. Not all the sermons in this book however, belong to the same category/ Nacpil’s sermon and even that of Gravador would not be as effective when delivered as they would be in their written form. In passing, Mr. Nacpil’s statement about the nuns would not altogether hold water and much less pass as as proverbial saying. Though small a volume and modest in presentation, the reader is caugh^ by surprise at the wake of very encouraging possibilities — the catholic priest learning the protestant pastor’s eloquential technique and mechanics, and, we hope, a book of this kind to be produced by the collaboration of both leaders.